Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 40 references

Eccentricity reduction of binary neutron star initial data with the entropy based flux limiting scheme

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Entropy-based flux limiter gives 5th-order convergent BNS waveforms

desk verdict Useful method advance, but the fifth-order convergence claim is over-strong given the time integrator; deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.17863 v2 pith:3BL2WFGC submitted 2024-12-20 gr-qc astro-ph.HE

Georgios Doulis , Sebastiano Bernuzzi , Wolfgang Tichy This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcastro-ph.HE
keywords neutronstarmergersgravitationalwavesnumericalrelativityentropy-basedfluxlimitingeccentricityreductionconvergenceorderhigh-resolutionshock-capturinginitialdata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that using the entropy-based flux limiting (EFL) scheme not just for the time evolution of binary neutron star mergers but also inside the eccentricity-reduction loop that constructs the initial data raises the phase convergence of the emitted gravitational waveforms to fifth order. The evidence comes from full numerical-relativity runs of two configurations: a non-spinning equal-mass pair and a spinning, unequal-mass pair, each evolved at three resolutions. For the pure EFL case, phase differences between resolutions follow the fifth-order rescaling factor for the dominant (2,2) mode and for the (3,2) and (4,4) subdominant modes, through inspiral and into the early post-merger regime. At matched resolution, the pure EFL waveform phase error is about a factor of two smaller than the same code's standard high-order scheme (HO-LLF), which converges only at second order. The point of the claim: waveform production for gravitational-wave astronomy needs controlled numerical error, and reaching optimal convergence at production resolutions would make templates more accurate at a fixed computational cost.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the entropy production function $\nu = \min(c_E |R|, 1)$, built from the entropy residual $R = \partial_t s + v^i \partial_i s$ of the relativistic hydrodynamics equations. It is a shock detector: at each cell interface the numerical flux is the convex combination $\theta \hat{f}^{\mathrm{HO}} + (1-\theta)\hat{f}^{\mathrm{LO}}$ with $\theta_{i\pm1/2} = 1 - \frac{1}{2}(\nu_i + \nu_{i\pm 1})$, so the scheme continuously drops from a high-order unfiltered flux to a stable WENOZ-based flux exactly where entropy production flags non-smooth flow. Around that limiter sits the eccentricity-reduction procedure: short EFL evolutions fit the binary's proper distance to a Keplerian ansatz, and the fit parameters correct either (radial velocity, eccentricity) or (radial velocity, orbital angular velocity), repeated until residual eccentricity stops decreasing. The mechanism concentrates numerical dissipation at stars' surfaces and merger shocks while leaving smooth inspiral regions to the high-order flux, which is why the global waveform phase error can decrease at fifth order.

What would settle it

Evolve the pure EFL BAM:95 configuration at a fourth resolution (for example n=160 or n=192 on the finest level) and compare the phase difference from the n=128 run with the fifth-order rescaling factor from Eq. (17); if the measured rate drops below fifth order, or if the n=96-based eccentricity-reduction tuning makes the phase differences depend on resolution in a non-power-law way, the fifth-order claim is falsified. Alternatively, compute a Richardson extrapolation of the three existing runs; an extrapolated order clearly below 5 would also refute the stated convergence rate.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the entropy-based flux limiter—used in both the iterative eccentricity reduction of SGRID initial data and the subsequent BAM evolution—yields gravitational waveforms whose phase converges at fifth order in the grid spacing at the currently used production resolutions. This is presented as the first demonstration of fifth-order convergence in binary neutron star waveform production. The convergence holds for the dominant (2,2) multipole and for subdominant (3,2) and (4,4) modes; a hybrid run that uses EFL only in evolution, with the standard HO-LLF scheme for eccentricity reduction, converges at third order, and the pure HO-LLF run converges at second order. The authors attribute the improvement to the combination of eccentricity-reduced initial data and the EFL switch, which confines numerical dissipation to the non-smooth features detected by entropy production.

Load-bearing premise

The claim assumes the three chosen resolutions are already in the regime where phase differences shrink at a fixed order of the grid spacing, and that using the middle resolution to tune the eccentricity reduction does not bias those phase differences.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The pure EFL pipeline produces waveform phase errors roughly a factor of two smaller than HO-LLF at the same resolution, so existing production grids can deliver more accurate waveforms without adding resolution.
  • Fifth-order convergence extends beyond the dominant (2,2) mode to the (3,2) and (4,4) multipoles, improving the fidelity of subdominant-mode physics near and after merger.
  • Using EFL in the eccentricity-reduction step is essential for the full gain: replacing only the evolution flux with EFL gives third order, while replacing both gives fifth order.
  • The two-parameter eccentricity-reduction variants cover both standard and more extreme (spinning, unequal-mass) BNS configurations, widening the class of initial data that can be prepared with this scheme.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the fifth-order rate persists at higher resolutions, the three-resolution runs shown here would already sit in the asymptotic regime, meaning error bars on waveform phase could be assigned from the measured scaling rather than from conservatively assuming second order.
  • The same entropy-switch construction could plausibly be transplanted to other finite-difference or conservation-law codes; the two test cases here are not a proof of generality, especially for high mass ratio, high spin, or exotic equations of state.
  • A stronger test would be a fourth resolution or a Richardson extrapolation against a high-resolution reference; the paper's visual matching of the rescaling factor does not by itself prove the asymptotic order.
  • If fifth-order convergence survives such a test, waveform template banks for parameter estimation could in principle quote per-mode phase-error budgets from the measured convergence rate, reducing the need for ad hoc safety factors.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. Doulis, Bernuzzi, and Tichy extend the entropy-based flux-limiting (EFL) hydrodynamics scheme from dynamical evolution to the eccentricity-reduction stage of binary neutron star (BNS) initial-data construction with the SGRID code. Two reduction algorithms are exercised, one driven by radial velocity and eccentricity and one driven by radial velocity and orbital angular velocity, and they are applied to the equal-mass nonspinning configuration BAM:95 and the unequal-mass spinning configuration MPA1q1.6. For BAM:95 the paper compares three scheme combinations (pure HO-LLF, hybrid HO-LLF reduction with EFL evolution, and pure EFL) at three resolutions (n=64, 96, 128 points on the finest level); for MPA1q1.6 the pure EFL data is evolved at the same three resolutions. Gravitational-wave phase differences between resolutions are analyzed by self-convergence with the rescaling factor of Eq. (17) for the (2,2), (3,2), and (4,4) modes. The paper reports second-order convergence for pure HO-LLF, third-order for the hybrid, and fifth-order for the pure EFL cases, and concludes that using EFL in both the eccentricity reduction and the evolution yields fifth-order convergent waveforms at current production resolutions, claims the first demonstration of fifth-order convergence in BNS waveform production, and estimates the pure EFL phase error at merger to be a factor of about 2 smaller than HO-LLF at matched resolution.

Significance. The methodological contribution is original and clearly described: embedding the EFL scheme in the SGRID eccentricity-reduction loop, for two reduction variants, with iteration tables (Tables II and IV) and grid specifications (Table VI) that make the procedure reproducible. A practical strength is that the entropy limiter is used without tuning its scale parameter c_E (Sec. II, c_E = 1 by default). The demonstration on a spinning unequal-mass system (MPA1q1.6) in addition to the equal-mass case strengthens the generality of the method. If the convergence claims hold, the result is significant for numerical relativity waveform production, moving BNS phase convergence from the second-order standard of most HRSC schemes (and the fourth-order result of the authors' previous EFL paper) to fifth order at production resolutions, with a measured phase-error improvement over the HO-LLF scheme in the same code.

major comments (4)
  1. [IV A 3; IV B 3; V] The central claim of fifth-order convergence is not supported as a statement about asymptotic convergence. The manuscript never specifies the temporal integration scheme; the cited BAM implementations [7,18] evolve the GRHD system with a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method of lines, and with the Courant factor fixed to 0.25 (Sec. II) the time step is proportional to the spatial step h. The temporal truncation error is therefore O(h^4), which bounds the global asymptotic order of the method-of-lines discretization at four. The observed fifth-order rescaling over (64,96,128) must consequently be a pre-asymptotic effect unless temporal error is shown to be subdominant at these resolutions, and the paper provides no temporal convergence study, no Richardson extrapolation, and no independent high-resolution reference. The Sec. V statement that these results are the first demonstration of fifth-order convergence in BNS waveform production therefore overstates the evidence; either supply an error-decomposition study (for example a time-step refinement test at fixed grid, or Richardson extrapolation that includes the temporal order) or re-scope the claim to pre-asymptotic, spatial-error-dominated convergence at production resolutions.
  2. [IV A 3, Eq. (17)] Equation (17), which defines the rescaling factor used to test the convergence order, is inconsistent with its stated purpose. For (ni,nj,nk)=(64,96,128) and p=5 it evaluates to s = 1 - (2/3)^5 / ((2/3)^5 - (1/2)^5) = -0.31, whereas the factor that maps the MID-HIG phase difference onto the LOW-MID difference for a p-th order error is (nk/nj)^p ((nj/ni)^p - 1) / ((nk/nj)^p - 1) = 8.6 for this resolution triple. As printed, the dashed curves in Figs. 5, 6, 9, and 10 cannot coincide with the solid curves in the way the text describes. Please correct Eq. (17) (or state the sign and ordering convention under which it applies) so that the rescaling procedure is reproducible.
  3. [IV A 3; IV B 3] The convergence order is inferred entirely by visual matching of rescaled phase differences against an assumed integer p; the text reports second-, third-, and fifth-order matches without a quantitative measure of the mismatch, without error bars on the phase differences, and without stating the retarded-time interval over which each match is evaluated. Because the fifth-order claim is the paper's central result, please add a quantitative diagnostic, for example the ratio dphi(LOW,MID)/dphi(MID,HIG) as a function of retarded time compared with the values predicted for integer orders, or a locally fitted convergence order p(u) with uncertainty estimates.
  4. [III; IV A 3; TABLE VI] The eccentricity-reduction loop measures the residual eccentricity and applies the stopping criterion using n=96 evolutions (Sec. III, steps ii-iii; the resolution is fixed in TABLE VI), so the middle member of the convergence triple is also the resolution used to tune the initial data. For the pure EFL case the final residual eccentricity is the largest of the three BAM:95 cases (TABLE V: e=0.7e-3 versus 0.4e-3 for pure HO-LLF), and the contribution of the residual eccentricity to the phase differences entering Eqs. (16)-(17) is not quantified. Please assess the sensitivity of the reported convergence order to this choice, for example by measuring e from the proper distance at all three resolutions for the final initial data or by re-running the reduction at n=128, and state how residual eccentricity affects the phase-difference comparison near merger.
minor comments (5)
  1. [IV A 3] The sentence that the expected rate of convergence is 5th-order for all cases is asserted without derivation; given that the temporal integration and the Z4c metric evolution are lower-order than the fifth-order reconstruction, the expected global rate requires justification, presumably as the expected spatial-error-dominated pre-asymptotic rate rather than an asymptotic one.
  2. [V; IV A 3; IV B 3] The conclusions state that fifth-order convergence is observed in the (3,2) and (4,4) modes without the qualifications present in the body: for BAM:95 the higher modes (and the (2,2) mode in the early post-merger phase) show third-order convergence through merger and in the early post-merger regime (Figs. 5 and 6), while for MPA1q1.6 the fifth-order trend is claimed to persist through the early post-merger (Figs. 9 and 10). Please state the convergence claim per mode and per phase interval so that the conclusions match the figures.
  3. [IV A 3] The comparison that the pure EFL phase error is a factor of about 2 smaller than pure HO-LLF compares the MID-HIG phase difference at merger, which is a resolution-specific self-convergence estimate, and the two cases have different residual eccentricities (TABLE V); please state explicitly that the factor refers to that estimate at the quoted resolutions and comment on its sensitivity to the eccentricity difference.
  4. [Figs. 5, 6, 9, 10] The figure captions do not define the gray shaded regions (described in the text as differences in merger times between runs), nor the sign and ordering convention of the plotted phase differences (which curve is dphi(LOW,MID) and which is the rescaled dphi(MID,HIG)); please add these definitions to the captions.
  5. [IV A 1; IV B 1] The numerical setup does not report the gravitational-wave extraction radius (or radii) used for Psi4 and the multipolar strain, the order of the spatial finite differencing and the Kreiss-Oliger dissipation used in the Z4c metric evolution, or the order of the time integrator actually used in these runs; reporting these is necessary to assess whether phase convergence could be limited by extraction or gauge effects.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the fifth-order convergence claim is an empirical self-convergence measurement, not a construction-level fit or an imported uniqueness theorem.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an empirical convergence-rate measurement, not a result derived from the EFL equations. The eccentricity-reduction procedure fits the proper-distance ansatz (10) and updates (v_r, e) or (v_r, Omega) via (11)-(13); these fitted parameters enter the initial-data construction, but the reported fifth-order phase convergence is obtained independently from three-resolution self-convergence studies (Eqs. 16-17, Figs. 5-6, 9-10). No equation in the paper defines the convergence order in terms of the fit parameters, and the pure-EFL versus hybrid-EFL comparison (Table V) shows that using EFL in eccentricity reduction is not what forces the order: hybrid EFL, which uses HO-LLF for eccentricity reduction, converges only at third order. Reliance on the authors' earlier EFL papers [9,16] is for the scheme definition and reconstruction choices, not as an unverified premise for the convergence claim. Concerns that the n=96-tuned initial data, the 4th-order time integrator, or the algebraic sign in Eq. (17) undermine the fifth-order inference are validity and correctness questions about the self-convergence analysis, not evidence that the outcome is equivalent to its inputs by construction. Accordingly, no circular step can be identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The free parameters are numerical choices in the EFL limiter, atmosphere treatment, and eccentricity-reduction fit. The axioms are standard GRHD assumptions plus the specific fitting and convergence-measurement assumptions that the paper relies on without independent verification.

free parameters (3)
  • c_E (entropy production scaling constant) = 1
    Set to unity in Eq. (8); a chosen constant controlling the limiter activation strength, not fitted in this work.
  • Atmosphere parameters (fatm, fthr) = 10^-11, 10^2
    Chosen numerical floors in Section IV A 1; can affect stellar surface dynamics and therefore convergence.
  • Proper-distance fit parameters (S0, A0, A1, B, omega_f, phi) = Fitted per iteration; values not reported
    Fitted to the proper-distance ansatz Eq. (10) and used to compute eccentricity and corrections in Eqs. (11)-(13); central to the eccentricity-reduction procedure.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The general relativistic hydrodynamic equations in conservation form (Eq. 1) accurately model neutron star matter.
    Standard 3+1 GRHD formulation, Section II; not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption The entropy residual R = dt s + v^i di s is a valid shock detector for the EFL limiter.
    Assumed from prior work [9,12]; the paper uses it without a new derivation or independent validation.
  • domain assumption The proper-distance eccentricity ansatz Eq. (10) correctly models the orbital dynamics over 2-3 orbit evolutions.
    Used in Section III to define eccentricity and compute corrections; a fitting model rather than a derived relation.
  • domain assumption Self-convergence with integer scaling (Eq. 17) at three resolutions correctly estimates the asymptotic convergence order.
    Assumed in Section IV A 3; no Richardson extrapolation or independent reference solution is provided.
  • domain assumption The BAM and SGRID codes correctly implement the equations and the EFL module.
    Tooling assumption throughout; no code or test suite is released.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Eccentricity reduction of binary neutron star initial data with the entropy based flux limiting scheme." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3BL2WFGC

@misc{pith2026241217863,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Eccentricity reduction of binary neutron star initial data with the entropy based flux limiting scheme},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3BL2WFGC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.17863}
}
read the original abstract

The construction of high-resolution shock-capturing schemes is vital in producing highly accurate gravitational waveforms from neutron star binaries. The entropy based flux limiting (EFL) scheme is able to perform fast converging binary neutron star merger simulations reaching up to fourth-order convergence in the gravitational waveform phase. In these results the EFL method was used only in the dynamical evolution of initial data constructed with the Lorene library. Here, we extend the use of the EFL method to the construction of eccentricity reduced initial data for neutron star binaries and present several new BNS simulations resulting from such initial data and show for the first time up to optimal fifth-order convergence in the gravitational waveform phase.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.17863 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. MPA1q1.6 proper distance as a function of time. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Two-dimensional hybrid plots depicting the entropy production and rest-mass density profiles across different stages [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. GW phase difference convergence rate study for the ten-orbit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. GW phase difference convergence rate study for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Two-dimensional hybrid plots depicting the entropy production and rest-mass density profiles across different stages [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. MPA1q1.6 waveform. The amplitude (blue line), the real part (green line) and the instantaneous frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. GW phase difference convergence rate study for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. GW phase difference convergence rate study for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    III A for BAM:95 [30]

    Numerical setup In the following, we study the dynamics of the BNS ini- tial data constructed in Sec. III A for BAM:95 [30]. This configuration is similar to BAM:97 [31], which was studied within the EFL framework in [9]. The main difference between these two BNS configurations lies in the way their initial data have been constructed: BAM:97 uses the Lore...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Hence, it is of great interest to study its be- haviour during the evolution of BNS merger simulations

    Qualitative behaviour of the entropy production The entropy production function ν plays central role in our method. Hence, it is of great interest to study its be- haviour during the evolution of BNS merger simulations. In the following, we discuss the two-dimensional entropy production profiles of the ten-orbit simulation BAM:95. In FIG. 3 we present two...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Following [7, 9], we use the curvature scalar Ψ 4 to compute the GWs on spheres at distance r from the origin

    Gravitational wave analysis We study now the effect of using the EFL method on the gravitational waveforms (GWs). Following [7, 9], we use the curvature scalar Ψ 4 to compute the GWs on spheres at distance r from the origin. First, spin weighted spherical harmonics are used to expand Ψ4 into its modes ψℓm and then the multipolar modes hℓm are re- construc...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Bernuzzi, A

    S. Bernuzzi, A. Nagar, M. Thierfelder, and B. Br¨ ugmann, Tidal effects in binary neutron star coalescence, Phys.Rev. D86, 044030 (2012), arXiv:1205.3403 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    IV A provides compelling evidence that the use of the pure EFL case results in GWs with significantly improved accuracy and enhanced convergence properties

    Numerical setup The detailed case study presented in Sec. IV A provides compelling evidence that the use of the pure EFL case results in GWs with significantly improved accuracy and enhanced convergence properties. Based on these find- ings, we focus exclusively on the pure EFL case in the subsequent analysis of the MPA1q1.6 configuration, as detailed in ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Qualitative behaviour of the entropy production We start with an analysis of the two-dimensional en- tropy production profiles obtained from the MPA1q1.6 simulation. This will enable us to study the behaviour of the entropy production function, ν, during different phases of the evolution which will provide us with cru- cial insights into the EFL method’s ...

    work page

  7. [7]

    The gravitational waveform de- rived from the MPA1q1.6 simulation is shown in FIG

    Gravitational wave analysis We analyse now the GWs resulting from the dynamical evolution of MPA1q1.6. The gravitational waveform de- rived from the MPA1q1.6 simulation is shown in FIG. 8. The waveform initially exhibits a periodic and smooth os- cillatory pattern, characteristic of the inspiral phase. As the system evolves, the amplitude steadily increas...

    work page

  8. [8]

    B. P. Abbott et al.(Virgo, LIGO Scientific), GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neu- tron Star Inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2017

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (GROND, SALT Group, Oz- Grav, DFN, INTEGRAL, Virgo, Insight-Hxmt, MAXI Team, Fermi-LAT, J-GEM, RATIR, IceCube, CAAS- TRO, L W A, ePESSTO, GRA WITA, RIMAS, SKA South Africa/MeerKAT, H.E.S.S., 1M2H Team, IKI-GW Follow-up, Fermi GBM, Pi of Sky, DWF (Deeper Wid...

    2017 arXiv

  2. [10]

    E. F. Toro, Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics, 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1999)

    1999

  3. [11]

    Guermond, R

    J.-L. Guermond, R. Pasquetti, and B. Popov, Entropy viscosity method for nonlinear conservation laws, Journal of Computational Physics 230, 4248 (2011), special issue High Order Methods for {CFD} Problems

    2011

  4. [12]

    Radice, L

    D. Radice, L. Rezzolla, and F. Galeazzi, Beyond second- order convergence in simulations of binary neutron stars in full general-relativity, Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc. 437, L46 (2014), arXiv:1306.6052 [gr-qc]

    2014 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Radice, L

    D. Radice, L. Rezzolla, and F. Galeazzi, High-Order 12 Fully General-Relativistic Hydrodynamics: new Ap- proaches and Tests, Class.Quant.Grav. 31, 075012 (2014), arXiv:1312.5004 [gr-qc]

    2014 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Bernuzzi and T

    S. Bernuzzi and T. Dietrich, Gravitational wave- forms from binary neutron star mergers with high- order weighted-essentially-nonoscillatory schemes in nu- merical relativity, Phys. Rev. D94, 064062 (2016), arXiv:1604.07999 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  7. [15]

    P. K. Sweby, High Resolution Schemes Using Flux Lim- iters for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 21, 995 (1984)

    1984

  8. [16]

    Doulis, F

    G. Doulis, F. Atteneder, S. Bernuzzi, and B. Br¨ ugmann, Entropy-limited higher-order central scheme for neu- tron star merger simulations, Phys. Rev. D 106, 024001 (2022), arXiv:2202.08839 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Guermond and R

    J.-L. Guermond and R. Pasquetti, Entropy-based nonlin- ear viscosity for fourier approximations of conservation laws, Comptes Rendus Mathematique 346, 801 (2008)

    2008

  10. [18]

    Thierfelder, S

    M. Thierfelder, S. Bernuzzi, and B. Br¨ ugmann, Nu- merical relativity simulations of binary neutron stars, Phys.Rev. D84, 044012 (2011), arXiv:1104.4751 [gr-qc]

    2011 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Guercilena, D

    F. Guercilena, D. Radice, and L. Rezzolla, Entropy- limited hydrodynamics: a novel approach to relativis- tic hydrodynamics, Comput. Astrophys. Cosmol. 4, 3 (2017), arXiv:1612.06251 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Gourgoulhon, P

    E. Gourgoulhon, P. Grandclement, K. Taniguchi, J.-A. Marck, and S. Bonazzola, Quasiequilibrium sequences of synchronized and irrotational binary neutron stars in general relativity: 1. Method and tests, Phys.Rev. D63, 064029 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0007028 [gr-qc]

    2001 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Tichy, Constructing quasi-equilibrium initial data for binary neutron stars with arbitrary spins, Phys

    W. Tichy, Constructing quasi-equilibrium initial data for binary neutron stars with arbitrary spins, Phys. Rev. D 86, 064024 (2012), arXiv:1209.5336 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Banyuls, J

    F. Banyuls, J. A. Font, J. M. A. Ibanez, J. M. A. Marti, and J. A. Miralles, Numerical 3+1 General Relativistic Hydrodynamics: A Local Characteristic Approach, As- trophys. J. 476, 221 (1997)

    1997

  15. [23]

    Doulis, S

    G. Doulis, S. Bernuzzi, and W. Tichy, Entropy based flux limiting scheme for conservation laws, (2024), arXiv:2401.04770 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    original

    uses also the initial radial velocity υr but replaces the eccentricity with the orbital angular velocity Ω. The motivation for this lies in the latter method’s enhanced ability to generate initial data for more extreme BNS configurations—such as those involving NSs of higher m...

  17. [25]

    Mignone, P

    A. Mignone, P. Tzeferacos, and G. Bodo, High-order conservative finite difference GLM-MHD schemes for cell-centered MHD, J.Comput.Phys. 229, 5896 (2010), arXiv:1001.2832 [astro-ph.HE]

    2010 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Borges, M

    R. Borges, M. Carmona, B. Costa, and W. S. Don, An improved weighted essentially non-oscillatory scheme for hyperbolic conservation laws, Journal of Computational Physics 227, 3191 (2008)

    2008

  19. [27]

    J. S. Hesthaven, Numerical Methods for Con- servation Laws (Society for Industrial and Ap- plied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, 2018) https://epubs.siam.org/doi/pdf/10.1137/1.9781611975109

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    Br¨ ugmann, J

    B. Br¨ ugmann, J. A. Gonzalez, M. Hannam, S. Husa, U. Sperhake, et al., Calibration of Moving Puncture Simulations, Phys.Rev. D77, 024027 (2008), arXiv:gr- qc/0610128 [gr-qc]

    2008

  21. [29]

    Dietrich, S

    T. Dietrich, S. Bernuzzi, M. Ujevic, and B. Br¨ ugmann, Numerical relativity simulations of neutron star merger remnants using conservative mesh refinement, Phys. Rev. D91, 124041 (2015), arXiv:1504.01266 [gr-qc]

    2015 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Dietrich, N

    T. Dietrich, N. Moldenhauer, N. K. Johnson-McDaniel, S. Bernuzzi, C. M. Markakis, B. Br¨ ugmann, and W. Tichy, Binary Neutron Stars with Generic Spin, Eccentricity, Mass ratio, and Compactness - Quasi- equilibrium Sequences and First Evolutions, Phys. Rev. D92, 124007 (2015), ...

    2015 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Tichy, A

    W. Tichy, A. Rashti, T. Dietrich, R. Dudi, and B. Br¨ ugmann, Constructing Binary Neutron Star Ini- tial Data with High Spins, High Compactness, and High Mass-Ratios, Phys. Rev. D100, 124046 (2019), arXiv:1910.09690 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Tichy, Black hole evolution with the BSSN sys- tem by pseudo-spectral methods, Phys.Rev

    W. Tichy, Black hole evolution with the BSSN sys- tem by pseudo-spectral methods, Phys.Rev. D74, 084005 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0609087 [gr-qc]

    2006 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Tichy, A New numerical method to construct binary neutron star initial data, Class.Quant.Grav

    W. Tichy, A New numerical method to construct binary neutron star initial data, Class.Quant.Grav. 26, 175018 (2009), arXiv:0908.0620 [gr-qc]

    2009 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Tichy, Long term black hole evolution with the BSSN system by pseudo-spectral methods, Phys.Rev

    W. Tichy, Long term black hole evolution with the BSSN system by pseudo-spectral methods, Phys.Rev. D80, 104034 (2009), arXiv:0911.0973 [gr-qc]

    2009 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Tichy, Initial data for binary neutron stars with arbitrary spins, Phys.Rev

    W. Tichy, Initial data for binary neutron stars with arbitrary spins, Phys.Rev. D84, 024041 (2011), arXiv:1107.1440 [gr-qc]

    2011 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Kyutoku, M

    K. Kyutoku, M. Shibata, and K. Taniguchi, Reducing orbital eccentricity in initial data of binary neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D90, 064006 (2014), arXiv:1405.6207 [gr-qc]

    2014 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Dietrich, S

    T. Dietrich, S. Bernuzzi, and W. Tichy, Closed-form tidal approximants for binary neutron star gravitational waveforms constructed from high-resolution numerical relativity simulations, Phys. Rev. D96, 121501 (2017), arXiv:1706.02969 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Dietrich, D

    T. Dietrich, D. Radice, S. Bernuzzi, F. Zappa, A. Perego, B. Br¨ ugmann, S. V. Chaurasia, R. Dudi, W. Tichy, and M. Ujevic, CoRe database of binary neutron star merger waveforms, Class. Quant. Grav. 35, 24LT01 (2018), arXiv:1806.01625 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Reisswig and D

    C. Reisswig and D. Pollney, Notes on the integration of numerical relativity waveforms, Class.Quant.Grav.28, 195015 (2011), arXiv:1006.1632 [gr-qc]

    2011 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Baumgarte and S

    T. Baumgarte and S. Shapiro, Numerical Relativity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010)

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.