Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 300 references

Next-generation GW detectors plus kilonovae can pin the neutron-star radius to ~0.2 km and H0 to ~1 km/s/Mpc in an ideal year of multi-messenger BNS events.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-31 07:20 UTC pith:DQW74DN6

load-bearing objection Solid end-to-end ET/CE multi-messenger forecast plus real hierarchical Bayesian joint inference; the ~0.2 km / ~1 km s−1 Mpc−1 numbers are explicitly ideal-scenario and should be read that way. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.28438 v1 pith:DQW74DN6 submitted 2026-07-30 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COnucl-th

Binary neutron stars in the next-generation era: Multi-messenger detection prospects and constraints on the equation of state, mass distribution, and cosmology

Hauke Koehn , Thibeau Wouters , Gilad Sadeh , Peter T.H. Pang , Mattia Bulla , Chris Van Den Broeck , Michael W. Coughlin , Tim Dietrich This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COnucl-th
keywords binary neutron starsmulti-messenger astronomyEinstein TelescopeCosmic Explorerequation of statekilonovaHubble constanthierarchical Bayesian inference
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper projects how many binary neutron star mergers next-generation gravitational-wave detectors (Einstein Telescope alone or with Cosmic Explorer) will catch together with electromagnetic counterparts, and how tightly those joint events can constrain neutron-star matter, the mass distribution, and cosmology. With a local merger rate of about 107 per cubic gigaparsec per year, ET alone yields roughly 40–100 identified optical/UV/IR counterparts per year; adding CE raises that to a few hundred. From the kilonova-bearing subset observed with ET, a fully Bayesian hierarchical analysis of gravitational-wave signals, light curves, and host redshifts recovers the essential shape of the mass distribution and, in an ideal setting with matched models, constrains the radius of a 1.4-solar-mass neutron star to roughly 0.2 km and the Hubble constant to roughly 1 km/s/Mpc. Light-curve data add little to the equation-of-state constraints once high-SNR gravitational-wave tides are in hand, but they help cosmological inference by tightening distance and inclination and mitigating selection bias toward face-on systems.

Core claim

In an ideal injection-recovery campaign focused on ET, the multi-messenger sample of kilonova-associated binary neutron stars can constrain the canonical neutron-star radius R1.4 to within about 0.2 km and H0 to within about 1 km s−1 Mpc−1 while recovering the main features of the mass distribution; kilonova light-curve posteriors have negligible impact on the equation of state once gravitational-wave tidal information is included, but they improve cosmological parameter recovery.

What carries the argument

Joint hierarchical Bayesian inference on equation-of-state, mass-distribution, and cosmological hyperparameters, with per-event posteriors represented by normalizing flows so the population likelihood can be evaluated efficiently and selection effects reweighted after sampling.

Load-bearing premise

The quoted radius and Hubble precisions assume perfect knowledge of the gravitational-wave waveform and kilonova emission models, with injection and recovery done with identical models and fitting formulae, so real model mismatch is set to zero.

What would settle it

After one year of real ET (or ET+CE) multi-messenger binary neutron star detections, measure whether the hierarchical posterior on R1.4 is actually at the ~0.2 km level and H0 at the ~1 km s−1 Mpc−1 level when independent nuclear or X-ray radius priors and independent H0 anchors are compared, or whether systematics in waveforms and ejecta models broaden or bias those intervals beyond the ideal forecast.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • ET alone should deliver tens of multi-messenger BNS events per year at the assumed merger rate, enough for sub-kilometer radius and percent-level H0 constraints in the ideal case.
  • Adding Cosmic Explorer multiplies the multi-messenger yield by several times, mainly through tighter sky localizations that enable more successful follow-up.
  • Equation-of-state inference will be driven by the handful of highest-SNR events with clear tides, not by sheer event count.
  • Kilonova light curves are more valuable for cosmology (distance/inclination and bias control) than for further tightening the dense-matter equation of state once GW tides are precise.
  • Late-time radio surveys can still recover tens of afterglows even when early optical counterparts are missed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If waveform or ejecta-model systematics remain at the levels the paper flags, the real R1.4 and H0 errors will be set by those systematics rather than by the statistical floor of ~0.2 km and ~1 km/s/Mpc.
  • The strong dependence of counterpart counts on the mass distribution (narrow versus wide, via prompt-collapse fraction) means an early multi-messenger sample will itself diagnose whether the Galactic narrow distribution or a broader one is closer to truth.
  • Because selection effects and inclination bias are hard to model exactly, cosmological analyses may need light-curve or jet information even when gravitational-wave SNRs are high.
  • Microphysical nuclear parameters (beyond bulk pressure near a few times saturation) will stay loosely constrained unless nuclear theory priors are folded in.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper forecasts multi-messenger BNS detection rates with ET and CE under two mass distributions and a fixed local merger rate of 106.6 Gpc^{-3} yr^{-1}, using a staged mock follow-up algorithm for prompt GRBs, UVOIR counterparts, and late afterglows. It then performs fully Bayesian hierarchical injection-recovery on the identified KN events (ET-only) to jointly constrain the EOS, mass distribution, and cosmology. In an ideal scenario with identical inject/recover models, the authors report R_{1.4} constrained to ~0.2 km and H_0 to ~1 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}, with KN light curves having negligible impact on the EOS but helping cosmological inference via inclination–distance constraints.

Significance. This is a substantial and timely contribution that unifies population synthesis, multi-messenger detection modeling, and hierarchical Bayesian inference in one framework. Strengths include the use of full Bayesian single-event posteriors (not FIM approximations) with normalizing flows, direct microphysical EOS sampling via jester/TOV solutions, publicly available analysis scripts, and an explicit comparison of GW-only versus multi-messenger hierarchical posteriors. The detection-rate tables and the ideal-scenario precision forecasts will be useful benchmarks for ET/CE science cases, provided the idealizations are kept clearly in view.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; Sec. 4.4; Apps. D–E] Sec. 4.4 and Apps. D–E state that GW waveforms and KN/ejecta models are identical at injection and recovery, and that the same NR-informed ejecta–mass fits used to build the catalogues are reused in the hierarchical likelihood (Eqs. 35–38). The headline R_{1.4} ≲ 0.2 km and H_0 ≲ 1 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} claims (abstract; Sec. 5) are therefore calibrated only under zero model mismatch. The paper already cites waveform systematics, ≳50% atomic/thermalization ejecta errors, and NR-fit differences as real-data failure modes. These caveats should be elevated into the abstract and conclusion so that the quoted intervals are not read as robust forecasts; a short quantitative stress test (e.g., one mismatched KN morphology or one alternate ejecta fit) would substantially strengthen the claim.
  2. [Appendix G; Sec. 4.2.2; Tables 6–7] Appendix G approximates p_det(λ) with a neural-network SNR cut plus a single Rubin i-band magnitude threshold, then clips extreme weights. The text notes that this imperfect reweighting leaves residual bias in mass-distribution hyperparameters (e.g., α and m_u for the narrow model; m_max for the wide model; Tables 6–7). Because selection correction is load-bearing for population and cosmology inference (less so for R_{1.4}, which is dominated by a few high-SNR tides), the paper should either (i) demonstrate that EOS/H_0 intervals are stable under alternate p_det prescriptions, or (ii) more clearly separate which quoted constraints are robust to the App. G approximation.
  3. [Sec. 2.3; Fig. 3; Table 4] Sec. 2.3 tunes the Blandford–Znajek fudge factor η_0 so that the synthetic Fermi/GBM fluence distribution matches observations (Fig. 3). GRB and afterglow detection counts in Table 4 and Fig. 5 therefore partly reflect this calibration rather than an ab initio jet model. The paper should state more explicitly which science conclusions (especially afterglow rates and the fraction of UVOIR counterparts that are pure GRB afterglows) inherit from this tuning, versus those driven by the KN channel alone.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 4] Table 4 bracketed afterglow numbers (late-time surveys without prior UVOIR) are useful but easy to misread; a one-sentence clarification in the caption would help.
  2. [Sec. 4.2.2; Fig. 6] The modest radius bias toward smaller R at fixed tight M–Λ (Sec. 4.2.2, Fig. 6) is attributed to CSE flexibility; a brief note on whether a different high-density extension would remove the bias would aid interpretation.
  3. [Sec. 4.2.1; Eq. (39)] Eq. (39) replaces the Puecher & Dietrich classifier with a simple k_coll cut for jax compatibility. State the fraction of catalogue events for which the two criteria disagree, if available.
  4. [Sec. 3.1; Sec. 4.3] Several typos and notation nits: “s (PSDs)” → “PSDs” (Sec. 3.1); “the proposed the proposed cosmology” (Sec. 4.3); inconsistent use of Ω_0 vs Ω_m.
  5. [Fig. 5] Fig. 5 orange/green patches distinguishing KN vs GRB-afterglow contributions are valuable; ensure the 30% flux criterion is restated in the caption.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Standard next-gen injection–recovery forecast; only mild circularity is η0 tuned to Fermi short-GRB fluences. Central R1.4/H0 widths are conditional ideal-scenario results, not forced by definition.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 2.3, Eqs. (18)–(19), Fig. 3]
    "Moreover, we have tuned the fudge factor in Eq. (19a) to η0 = 0.016, so that the resulting fluence distribution matches the Fermi/GBM short GRB samples (Colombo et al. 2022; Loffredo et al. 2025), more details are provided below. ... To ensure consistency between our ad-hoc prescriptions for the gamma-ray energy Eγ and the observed short GRB population, we tuned η0 in such a way that our results roughly agree with the fluence distribution of short Fermi/GBM GRBs"

    η0 is adjusted until the synthetic bolometric fluence histogram reproduces the observed Fermi/GBM short-GRB sample (Fig. 3, including the 0.6 duty-cycle rescaling). Projected prompt-GRB and GRB-afterglow detection counts therefore partly inherit that calibration by construction rather than arising as independent first-principles forecasts. This does not force the paper’s headline R1.4 or H0 intervals, which come from KN-selected GW hierarchical runs, but it does make the GRB multi-messenger rate panels non-predictive for the tuned observable.

full rationale

The paper is a forward population-synthesis and hierarchical injection–recovery study. Detection counts and hierarchical posteriors are generated from explicit mock catalogues (fixed local rate 106.6 Gpc−3 yr−1, two mass models, QMC-RMF3 EOS) and a mock EM follow-up algorithm; the abstract and Sec. 4 explicitly label the R1.4 ≲ 0.2 km and H0 ≲ 1 km s−1 Mpc−1 figures as an “ideal scenario.” Recovered precision is not algebraically equal to any fitted input: it is set by network SNRs, number of KN-selected events, and tidal information content under matched inject/recover models (disclosed in Sec. 4.4 and Apps. D–E). Self-citations (possis/fiesta surrogates, jester, prior multi-messenger pipelines) supply tools and priors, not load-bearing uniqueness theorems. The sole clear fitted-input step is the Blandford–Znajek fudge factor η0, tuned so the synthetic short-GRB fluence histogram matches Fermi/GBM; that forces intermediate GRB rate/fluence plots (Fig. 3) but does not determine the EOS or H0 hierarchical widths, which are driven by GW tides plus host redshifts (and secondarily KN light curves). Selection-effect reweighting (App. G) is approximate and visibly biases some mass-distribution hyperparameters, but that is a modelling limitation, not a circular reduction of the central claims. Overall circularity is minor and proportionate to score 2.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 8 axioms · 2 invented entities

Projections rest on a fixed local rate and delay-time model, one injected EOS, two parametric mass/spin models, NR-informed ejecta fits plus ad-hoc wind fraction and jet efficiency knobs, simplified telescope decision rules, and perfect inject=recover model identity. Hierarchical claims further assume 1% host-redshift errors, a coarse detection-probability reweighting, and meta-model+CSE EOS priors. These are mostly standard domain tools plus several paper-specific fudge factors.

free parameters (7)
  • local merger rate density Rn / R(0) = R(0)=106.6 Gpc−3 yr−1
    Rn=50 Gpc−3 yr−1 and delay τ=3 Gyr set R(0)=106.6 Gpc−3 yr−1; all absolute detection counts scale linearly with this choice.
  • Blandford–Znajek fudge factor η0 = η0=0.016
    Tuned in Eq. (19a) so synthetic Fermi/GBM fluences match the observed short-GRB sample (Sec. 2.3).
  • wind-to-disk mass fraction ζ distributions = prompt: TN(0.2,0.1); remnant: TN(0.5,0.2)
    Ad-hoc truncated normals (Eqs. 15–16) control bright KN rates; paper notes most detectable KNe need large wind ejecta.
  • gamma-ray efficiency ηγ = U(0.01,0.15)
    Drawn uniformly 0.01–0.15 (Sec. 2.3) with limited short-GRB empirical anchor.
  • ISM density prior for afterglows = U(−5,0) in log10 cm−3
    log10(nism) ~ U(−5,0) (Eq. 26) directly sets afterglow peak flux/time and late-time detection counts.
  • instrument ΔΩ and dL follow-up thresholds = network-dependent cuts in App. B
    Telescope- and network-specific cuts in App. B/C (e.g. Rubin ΔΩ≤10 deg2 with CE) are chosen by hand to keep telescope time plausible and dominate counterpart counts.
  • EM systematic magnitude floor σsys = U(0.3,1) mag
    Uniform 0.3–1 mag broadening in light-curve PE (App. E) to mimic model error; affects how much EM informs hierarchy.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption Source-frame merger rate follows Madau–Dickinson SFR convolved with exponential delay-time distribution independent of mass/spin.
    Sec. 2.1 Eqs. (3)–(4); standard but not unique delay model.
  • domain assumption Single EOS (QMC-RMF3) and perfect spin–orbit alignment for all catalogue events.
    Sec. 2.1; radii/tides and ejecta inherit this fixed nuclear model.
  • domain assumption Prompt collapse and ejecta masses given by specified NR fits / ML classifier (or k_coll MTOV proxy in inference).
    Secs. 2.2, 4.2.1; different literature fits can change ejecta substantially (acknowledged).
  • domain assumption GW detection if network SNR>12; 90% sky area from Fisher matrix (gwfish), 100% duty cycle.
    Sec. 3.1; FIM and full duty cycle known to bias localization/rates.
  • ad hoc to paper Counterpart 'detected' after ≥2 filter/epoch/instrument flags with no impostor contamination and random tiling order.
    Sec. 3.2 and App. B; authors note this overcounts relative to real classification.
  • domain assumption Host cosmological redshift known to 1% Gaussian error; flat ΛCDM with only H0, Ω0 free in cosmology runs.
    Secs. 4.2.1, 4.3; peculiar-velocity floor and two-parameter cosmology.
  • ad hoc to paper Hierarchical likelihood uses NF density estimates of single-event posteriors and approximate p_det reweighting with clipping.
    Sec. 4.1, App. G; selection treatment is coarse and affects mass-distribution recovery.
  • ad hoc to paper Injected and recovered GW/KN models are identical (no waveform or radiative-transfer mismatch).
    Sec. 4.4; explicitly idealizes away the dominant real-world systematic for the precision claims.
invented entities (2)
  • Mock multi-messenger follow-up algorithm (staged UVOIR + late afterglow surveys) no independent evidence
    purpose: Map GW localizations and light curves to yearly counterpart and afterglow counts per instrument/network.
    Not a physical entity but a paper-specific operational model (Fig. 4, Apps. B–C) that defines the detection catalogues feeding hierarchical inference.
  • Extended possis ML surrogate geometry for wide ejecta parameter space no independent evidence
    purpose: Generate KN light curves across the catalogue ejecta range (App. A).
    Engineering extension of prior possis/Kawaguchi geometry; validated only within the paper's simulation set.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-daily-grok45 · 57657 in / 4690 out tokens · 89116 ms · 2026-07-31T07:20:23.100025+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Next-generation gravitational-wave (GW) observatories will provide crucial insights into the nature of neutron star (NS) matter and the cosmological expansion history. We estimate the number of multi-messenger detections from binary neutron stars (BNS) with the Einstein Telescope (ET) and Cosmic Explorer (CE), and project the resulting constraints on the equation of state (EOS), BNS mass distribution, and cosmology via joint hierarchical Bayesian inference. Assuming a local merger rate of 106.6 Gpc$^{-3}$ yr$^{-1}$ and considering two different mass functions, a narrow one centred around 1.4 $M_\odot$ and a wide one ranging between 1.1--2 $M_\odot$, we find that for ET, our mock follow-up algorithm results in at least $\sim40$ and up to $\sim100$ successfully identified electromagnetic counterparts per year, depending on the detector layout and mass distribution. In a joint network with CE, the number of multi-messenger detections can range from $\sim 200$ to $\sim500$. Additionally, several more afterglows from gamma-ray bursts or KNe could be found with dedicated late-time observations. Based on the identified multi-messenger events, we perform an injection campaign to hierarchically constrain the EOS, mass distribution, and cosmology in a fully Bayesian framework. Focussing on ET alone, we show how in an ideal scenario, GW signals, KNe, and host galaxy redshifts can constrain the canonical NS radius $R_{1.4}$ within $\sim 0.2$ km and the Hubble constant $H_0$ within $\sim 1$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, while recovering the essential features of the mass distribution. By comparing inference results that rely solely on GW data and those that incorporate light curve information, we find that while KN light-curve posteriors have a negligible impact on the EOS constraints, they can benefit the inference of cosmological parameters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28438 by Chris Van Den Broeck, Gilad Sadeh, Hauke Koehn, Mattia Bulla, Michael W. Coughlin, Peter T.H. Pang, Thibeau Wouters, Tim Dietrich.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Narrow (green) and wide (blue) mass distributions used to generate our BNSs. The solid lines show the marginalized mass distribution of the heavier NS and the dashed lines of the lighter one. stars formed at redshift 𝑧 ′ will result in merging BNSs at redshift 𝑧 R (𝑧) = Rn × ∫ ∞ 𝑧 𝜓(𝑧 ′ )D (𝑧 | 𝑧 ′ ) 𝑑𝑧′ . (3) We adopt a simple analytical expression (Du et al. 2025) D (𝑧 | 𝑧 ′ ) = 1 𝜏 exp  − 𝑡(𝑧) − 𝑡(𝑧 ′ … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Ejecta properties for the BNS catalogues with the narrow (green) and wide (blue) mass distributions. The histograms with no filling and lighter colors represent BNSs that undergo prompt collapse. The distributions of 300 apparent 𝑖 band light curves for the narrow (penultimate panel) and wide (last panel) distributions are also shown. There, black (orange) solid lines are the median magnitude for KNe withi… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Top: Distribution of the observable bolometric fluence between 0.1–1 MeV for the narrow (green) and wide (blue) BNS mass distribution. For comparison, we show the fluence distribution of the short GRBs observed by FERMI-GBM as grey dashed line. The rates from our catalogues are scaled to a duty cycle factor of 0.6. Bottom: Isotropic kinetic energy-equivalent. The grey band indicates the 95% credibility int… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic overview of the mock detection algorithm that we use to determine for which BNS GW signals an EM counterpart will be detected. Starting from the GW detection, we check whether a KN or UVOIR afterglow can be found in the first days, and, depending on the result, search for the remaining afterglow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Redshift distribution of our projected BNS detections in one year. The rows correspond to a specific next-generation GW detector network. The left and right columns are for the narrow or wide mass distribution respectively. Different types of detections (GW signal, GW signal with UVOIR counterpart, etc.) are colour-coded according to the legend. The dotted line corresponds to the entire cosmic BNS populati… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Joint hierarchical inference of the EOS and mass distribution from the KN events in the narrow+ETL catalogue. The posteriors are obtained using either only the GW data (purple) or the full multi-messenger data (orange). The top panels show the EOS posterior equivalently in terms of the 𝑀-Λ, 𝑀-𝑅, and 𝑛-𝑝 relationship with the 95% credibility limits at each mass or density (shaded areas) and the highest-like… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: EOS posteriors from the KN events in narrow+ETL when the full multi-messenger information is used (orange) and when only based on the GW signals and host galaxy redshifts (blue). The top panel shows the 95% credibility intervals on the relative error for the 𝑀-Λ relationship (shaded areas) and the median of the relative error (dotted line). The bottom panel displays the 𝑀-𝑅 relationships, with the same lay… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: EOS and mass distribution inference from the KN events in the wide+ETL catalogue. The layout is equivalent to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: EOS and mass distribution inference from the KN events in the narrow+ETΔ catalogue. The layout is equivalent to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Posterior on the nuclear empirical parameters from the multi￾messenger inferences. We show the 95% credibility contours in different colours according to the legend. The values from our injected QMC-RMF3 EOS are marked in red. events, has only a negligible impact on the EOS, if any. Similarly, we find that the recovery of the mass distribution is enhanced by the host galaxy redshifts, but not by adding th… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Cosmological constraints from the KN events in all our catalogues, compared in different colours according to the legend. We show the 95% credibility region for 𝐻0 and Ω0, with the injected Planck18 parameters shown marked by red lines. as hyperparameters in our hierarchical inference. The conditional distribution linking the relevant source properties, i.e., 𝑑𝐿 and 𝑧, to the cosmological parameters 𝐻0 an… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Joint hierarchical inference of the EOS, mass distribution, 𝐻0, and Ω0 from the KN events in the narrow+ETL catalogue. We show both the multi-messenger posterior (orange) and the posterior using the GW data and host galaxy redshift, but no light curve posteriors (blue). The layout is equivalent to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_13.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

300 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    New and robust gravitational-waveform model for high-mass-ratio binary neutron star systems with dynamical tidal effects

    Abac, Adrian and Dietrich, Tim and Buonanno, Alessandra and Steinhoff, Jan and Ujevic, Maximiliano. New and robust gravitational-waveform model for high-mass-ratio binary neutron star systems with dynamical tidal effects. Phys. Rev. D. 2024. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.024062. arXiv:2311.07456

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Inferring Prompt Black-Hole Formation in Neutron Star Mergers from Gravitational-Wave Data

    Agathos, Michalis and Zappa, Francesco and Bernuzzi, Sebastiano and Perego, Albino and Breschi, Matteo and Radice, David. Inferring Prompt Black-Hole Formation in Neutron Star Mergers from Gravitational-Wave Data. Phys. Rev. D. 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.044006. arXiv:1908.05442

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  3. [3]

    Aksulu, M. D. and Wijers, R. A. M. J. and van Eerten, H. J. and van der Horst, A. J. Exploring the GRB population: robust afterglow modelling. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2022. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac246. arXiv:2106.14921

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    Alexander, K. D. and others. The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/VIRGO GW170817. VI. Radio Constraints on a Relativistic Jet and Predictions for Late-Time Emission from the Kilonova Ejecta. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2017. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa905d. arXiv:1710.05457

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    and Brodie, Liam and Haber, Alexander and Tews, Ingo

    Alford, Mark G. and Brodie, Liam and Haber, Alexander and Tews, Ingo. Relativistic mean-field theories for neutron-star physics based on chiral effective field theory. Phys. Rev. C. 2022. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.106.055804. arXiv:2205.10283

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    and Brodie, Liam and Haber, Alexander and Tews, Ingo

    Alford, Mark G. and Brodie, Liam and Haber, Alexander and Tews, Ingo. Tabulated equations of state from models informed by chiral effective field theory. Phys. Scripta. 2023. doi:10.1088/1402-4896/ad03c8. arXiv:2304.07836

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    and Anand, Shreya and Alqassimi, Khalid and Guessoum, Nidhal and Singer, Leo P

    Almualla, Mouza and Coughlin, Michael W. and Anand, Shreya and Alqassimi, Khalid and Guessoum, Nidhal and Singer, Leo P. Dynamic scheduling: target of opportunity observations of gravitational wave events. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2020. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1498. arXiv:2003.09718

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    and others

    Andreoni, I. and others. Follow up of GW170817 and its electromagnetic counterpart by Australian-led observing programs. Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 2017. doi:10.1017/pasa.2017.65. arXiv:1710.05846

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  9. [9]

    Target-of-opportunity Observations of Gravitational-wave Events with Vera C

    Andreoni, Igor and others. Target-of-opportunity Observations of Gravitational-wave Events with Vera C. Rubin Observatory. Astrophys. J. Supp. 2022. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac617c. arXiv:2111.01945

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  10. [10]

    Enabling kilonova science with Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

    Andreoni, Igor and others. Enabling kilonova science with Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope. Astropart. Phys. 2024. doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2023.102904. arXiv:2307.09511

    arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    Rubin ToO 2024: Envisioning the Vera C

    Andreoni, Igor and others. Rubin ToO 2024: Envisioning the Vera C. Rubin Observatory LSST Target of Opportunity program. 2024. arXiv:2411.04793

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Optical Follow-up of Gravitational-wave Events with Las Cumbres Observatory

    Arcavi, Iair and others. Optical Follow-up of Gravitational-wave Events with Las Cumbres Observatory. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2017. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa910f. arXiv:1710.05842

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  13. [13]

    BILBY: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy

    Ashton, Gregory and others. BILBY: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 2019. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab06fc. arXiv:1811.02042

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  14. [14]

    arXiv e-prints , keywords =

    JWST's GLIMPSE: an overview of the deepest probe of early galaxy formation and cosmic reionization. arXiv e-prints , keywords =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2511.07542 , archivePrefix =. 2511.07542 , primaryClass =

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.07542

  15. [15]

    Overlapping signals in next-generation gravitational wave observatories: A recipe for selecting the best parameter estimation technique

    Baka, Tomasz and Narola, Harsh and Janquart, Justin and Samajdar, Anuradha and Dietrich, Tim and Van Den Broeck, Chris. Overlapping signals in next-generation gravitational wave observatories: A recipe for selecting the best parameter estimation technique. Phys. Rev. D. 2025. doi:10.1103/8cwp-mxcd. arXiv:2507.10304

    arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Makai and Lasky, Paul D

    Baker, A. Makai and Lasky, Paul D. and Thrane, Eric and Golomb, Jacob. Significant challenges for astrophysical inference with next-generation gravitational-wave observatories. Phys. Rev. D. 2025. doi:10.1103/n6t6-5wn3. arXiv:2503.04073

    arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Pre-merger alert to detect prompt emission in very-high-energy gamma-rays from binary neutron star mergers: Einstein Telescope and Cherenkov Telescope Array synergy

    Banerjee, Biswajit and others. Pre-merger alert to detect prompt emission in very-high-energy gamma-rays from binary neutron star mergers: Einstein Telescope and Cherenkov Telescope Array synergy. Astron. Astrophys. 2023. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202345850. arXiv:2212.14007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  18. [18]

    and Dietrich, Tim and Groom, Steven L

    Barna, Tyler and Reed, Brandon and Andreoni, Igor and Coughlin, Michael W. and Dietrich, Tim and Groom, Steven L. and Laz, Theophile Jegou du and Pang, Peter T. H. and Purdum, Josiah N. and Rusholme, Ben. An online framework for fitting fast transient light curves. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2024. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1164. arXiv:2404.17515

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    IIb or not IIb: A Catalog of ZTF Kilonova Imposters

    Barna, Tyler and others. IIb or not IIb: A Catalog of ZTF Kilonova Imposters. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 2025. doi:10.1088/1538-3873/adf578. arXiv:2506.15900

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Barthelmy, S. D. and others. The Burst Alert Telescope (BAT) on the Swift MIDEX mission. Space Sci. Rev. 2005. doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5096-3. arXiv:astro-ph/0507410

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  21. [21]

    and Baumgarte, T

    Bauswein, A. and Baumgarte, T. W. and Janka, H. -T. Prompt merger collapse and the maximum mass of neutron stars. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.131101. arXiv:1307.5191

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  22. [22]

    The effect of spin mismodelling on gravitational-wave measurements of the binary neutron star mass distribution

    Biscoveanu, Sylvia and Talbot, Colm and Vitale, Salvatore. The effect of spin mismodelling on gravitational-wave measurements of the binary neutron star mass distribution. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2022. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac347. arXiv:2111.13619

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Simultaneously constraining the neutron star equation of state and mass distribution through multimessenger observations and nuclear benchmarks

    Biswas, Bhaskar and Rosswog, Stephan. Simultaneously constraining the neutron star equation of state and mass distribution through multimessenger observations and nuclear benchmarks. Phys. Rev. D. 2025. doi:10.1103/8lv3-1ywb. arXiv:2408.15192

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    The role of peculiar velocity uncertainties in standard siren cosmology

    Blake, Chris and Turner, Ryan J. The role of peculiar velocity uncertainties in standard siren cosmology. 2025. arXiv:2509.03101

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Blandford, R. D. and Znajek, R. L. Electromagnetic extractions of energy from Kerr black holes. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 1977. doi:10.1093/mnras/179.3.433

    doi:10.1093/mnras/179.3.433 1977

  26. [26]

    Bellm, E. C. and others. The Zwicky Transient Facility: System Overview, Performance, and First Results. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe , archivePrefix =

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

  27. [27]

    Energies of GRB blast waves and prompt efficiencies as implied by modelling of X-ray and GeV afterglows

    Beniamini, Paz and Nava, Lara and Barniol Duran, Rodolfo and Piran, Tsvi. Energies of GRB blast waves and prompt efficiencies as implied by modelling of X-ray and GeV afterglows. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2015. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2033. arXiv:1504.04833

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  28. [28]

    A revised analysis of gamma-ray bursts prompt efficiencies

    Beniamini, Paz and Nava, Lara and Piran, Tsvi. A revised analysis of gamma-ray bursts prompt efficiencies. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2016. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1331. arXiv:1606.00311

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  29. [29]

    Ready, Set, Launch: Time Interval between a Binary Neutron Star Merger and Short Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Formation

    Beniamini, Paz and Duran, Rodolfo Barniol and Petropoulou, Maria and Giannios, Dimitrios. Ready, Set, Launch: Time Interval between a Binary Neutron Star Merger and Short Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Formation. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2020. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab9223. arXiv:2001.00950

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [30]

    Long-lived neutron-star remnants from asymmetric binary neutron star mergers: element formation, kilonova signals and gravitational waves

    Bernuzzi, Sebastiano and Magistrelli, Fabio and Jacobi, Maximilian and Logoteta, Domenico and Perego, Albino and Radice, David. Long-lived neutron-star remnants from asymmetric binary neutron star mergers: element formation, kilonova signals and gravitational waves. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2025. doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1147. arXiv:2409.18185

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    and Vergani, S

    Bisero, S. and Vergani, S. D. and Loffredo, E. and Branchesi, M. and Hazra, N. and Dupletsa, U. and Anderson, R. I. Multi-messenger observations of binary neutron star mergers: Synergies between next-generation gravitational wave interferometers and wide-field, high-multiplex spectroscopic facilities. Astron. Astrophys. 2026. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/2025562...

    arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    and others

    Bonaldi, A. and others. Square Kilometre Array Science Data Challenge 1: analysis and results. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2020. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3023. arXiv:2009.13346

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  33. [33]

    Science with the Einstein Telescope: a comparison of different designs

    Branchesi, Marica and others. Science with the Einstein Telescope: a comparison of different designs. JCAP. 2023. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/07/068. arXiv:2303.15923

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  34. [34]

    Anticipated Performance of the Square Kilometre Array -- Phase 1 (SKA1)

    Braun, Robert and Bonaldi, Anna and Bourke, Tyler and Keane, Evan and Wagg, Jeff. Anticipated Performance of the Square Kilometre Array -- Phase 1 (SKA1). 2019. arXiv:1912.12699

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [35]

    Constraints on the Maximum Densities of Neutron Stars from Postmerger Gravitational Waves with Third-Generation Observations

    Breschi, Matteo and Bernuzzi, Sebastiano and Godzieba, Daniel and Perego, Albino and Radice, David. Constraints on the Maximum Densities of Neutron Stars from Postmerger Gravitational Waves with Third-Generation Observations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2022. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.161102. arXiv:2110.06957

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    Impact of Systematic Modeling Uncertainties on Kilonova Property Estimation

    Brethauer, Daniel and Kasen, Daniel and Margutti, Raffaella and Chornock, Ryan. Impact of Systematic Modeling Uncertainties on Kilonova Property Estimation. Astrophys. J. 2024. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7d83. arXiv:2408.02731

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    POSSIS: predicting spectra, light curves and polarization for multi-dimensional models of supernovae and kilonovae

    Bulla, Mattia. POSSIS: predicting spectra, light curves and polarization for multi-dimensional models of supernovae and kilonovae. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2019. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2495. arXiv:1906.04205

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  38. [38]

    The critical role of nuclear heating rates, thermalization efficiencies, and opacities for kilonova modelling and parameter inference

    Bulla, Mattia. The critical role of nuclear heating rates, thermalization efficiencies, and opacities for kilonova modelling and parameter inference. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2023. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad232. arXiv:2211.14348

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  39. [39]

    and Goldstein, Adam and Pelassa, Veronique and Troja, Eleonora

    Burns, Eric and Connaughton, Valerie and Zhang, Bin-Bin and Lien, Amy and Briggs, Michael S. and Goldstein, Adam and Pelassa, Veronique and Troja, Eleonora. Do the Fermi Gamma-Ray Burst Monitor and Swift Burst Alert Telescope see the Same Short Gamma-Ray Bursts?. Astrophys. J. 2016. doi:10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/110. arXiv:1512.00923

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  40. [40]

    Cabezas, Alberto and Corenflos, Adrien and Lao, Junpeng and Louf, Rémi and others , title = ". 2024. arXiv:2402.10797

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    Exploiting the Einstein Telescope to solve the Hubble tension

    Califano, Matteo and de Martino, Ivan and Vernieri, Daniele and Capozziello, Salvatore. Exploiting the Einstein Telescope to solve the Hubble tension. Phys. Rev. D. 2023. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.123519. arXiv:2208.13999

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  42. [42]

    Camisasca, A. E. and Steele, I. A. and Bulla, M. and Guidorzi, C. and Shrestha, M. Optimizing the observation of optical kilonovae with medium-size telescopes. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2023. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1102. arXiv:2307.04031

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Lensing bias on cosmological parameters from bright standard sirens

    Canevarolo, Sofia and Chisari, Nora Elisa. Lensing bias on cosmological parameters from bright standard sirens. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2024. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1713. arXiv:2310.12764

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  44. [44]

    and others

    Capote, E. and others. Advanced LIGO detector performance in the fourth observing run. Phys. Rev. D. 2025. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.062002. arXiv:2411.14607

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    CE DCC document T2000017-v9

    Kuns, Kevin and Fulda, Paul and Barsotti, Lisa and Evans, Matthew. CE DCC document T2000017-v9. 2025

    2025

  46. [46]

    and Perkins, Scott and Yagi, Kent and Yunes, Nicol \'a s

    Chatterjee, Deep and Hegade K R, Abhishek and Holder, Gilbert and Holz, Daniel E. and Perkins, Scott and Yagi, Kent and Yunes, Nicol \'a s. Cosmology with Love: Measuring the Hubble constant using neutron star universal relations. Phys. Rev. D. 2021. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.083528. arXiv:2106.06589

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.14809193 , url =

    Chatterjee, Debarati and Davis, Philip and Dexheimer, Veronica and Ishizuka, Chikako and Klähn, Thomas and Mancini, Marco and Oertel, Micaela and Novak, Jêrome and Pais, Helena and Providência, Constança and Raduta, Adriana R and Servillat, Mathieu and Tolos, Laura and Typel, Stefan , title =. doi:10.5281/zenodo.14809193 , url =

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14809193

  48. [48]

    A two per cent Hubble constant measurement from standard sirens within five years

    Chen, Hsin-Yu and Fishbach, Maya and Holz, Daniel E. A two per cent Hubble constant measurement from standard sirens within five years. Nature. 2018. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0606-0. arXiv:1712.06531

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  49. [49]

    Systematic Uncertainty of Standard Sirens from the Viewing Angle of Binary Neutron Star Inspirals

    Chen, Hsin-Yu. Systematic Uncertainty of Standard Sirens from the Viewing Angle of Binary Neutron Star Inspirals. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.201301. arXiv:2006.02779

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Mitigating the Counterpart Selection Effect for Standard Sirens

    Chen, Hsin-Yu and Talbot, Colm and Chase, Eve A. Mitigating the Counterpart Selection Effect for Standard Sirens. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2024. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.191003. arXiv:2307.10402

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    An Overview of CHIME, the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment

    Amiri, Mandana and others. An Overview of CHIME, the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment. Astrophys. J. Supp. 2022. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac6fd9. arXiv:2201.07869

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    Magnetically Driven Baryon Winds from Binary Neutron Star Merger Remnants and the Blue Kilonova of 2017 August

    Ciolfi, Riccardo and Kalinani, Jay Vijay. Magnetically Driven Baryon Winds from Binary Neutron Star Merger Remnants and the Blue Kilonova of 2017 August. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2020. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abb240. arXiv:2004.11298

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  53. [53]

    and Yakut, Kadri and Giacomazzo, Bruno

    C okluk, Kutay A. and Yakut, Kadri and Giacomazzo, Bruno. General relativistic simulations of high-mass binary neutron star mergers: rapid formation of low-mass stellar black holes. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2023. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3752. arXiv:2301.09635

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  54. [54]

    Multi-messenger Observations of Binary Neutron Star Mergers in the O4 Run

    Colombo, Alberto and Salafia, Om Sharan and Gabrielli, Francesco and Ghirlanda, Giancarlo and Giacomazzo, Bruno and Perego, Albino and Colpi, Monica. Multi-messenger Observations of Binary Neutron Star Mergers in the O4 Run. Astrophys. J. 2022. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8d00. arXiv:2204.07592

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  55. [55]

    and Nava, Lara and Giacomazzo, Bruno and Colpi, Monica

    Colombo, Alberto and Salafia, Om Sharan and Ghirlanda, Giancarlo and Iacovelli, Francesco and Mancarella, Michele and Broekgaarden, Floor S. and Nava, Lara and Giacomazzo, Bruno and Colpi, Monica. Multi-messenger observations in the Einstein Telescope era: Binary neutron star and black hole neutron star mergers. Astron. Astrophys. 2025. doi:10.1051/0004-6...

    arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Astro2020 Science White Paper: Radio Counterparts of Compact Object Mergers in the Era of Gravitational-Wave Astronomy

    Corsi, Alessandra and others. Astro2020 Science White Paper: Radio Counterparts of Compact Object Mergers in the Era of Gravitational-Wave Astronomy. 2019. arXiv:1903.10589

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  57. [57]

    Cowperthwaite, P. S. and others. The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. II. UV, Optical, and Near-infrared Light Curves and Comparison to Kilonova Models. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2017. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8fc7. arXiv:1710.05840

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  58. [58]

    and others

    Coughlin, Michael W. and others. Optimizing searches for electromagnetic counterparts of gravitational wave triggers. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2018. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1066. arXiv:1803.02255

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  59. [59]

    and Dietrich, Tim and Margalit, Ben and Metzger, Brian D

    Coughlin, Michael W. and Dietrich, Tim and Margalit, Ben and Metzger, Brian D. Multimessenger Bayesian parameter inference of a binary neutron star merger. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2019. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz133. arXiv:1812.04803

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  60. [60]

    and others

    Coughlin, Michael W. and others. Optimizing multitelescope observations of gravitational-wave counterparts. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2019. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2485. arXiv:1909.01244

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  61. [61]

    Coulter, D. A. and others. Swope Supernova Survey 2017a (SSS17a), the Optical Counterpart to a Gravitational Wave Source. Science. 2017. doi:10.1126/science.aap9811. arXiv:1710.05452

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    Magnetar Central Engines in Gamma-Ray Bursts Follow the Universal Relation of Accreting Magnetic Stars

    Dall'Osso, Simone and Stratta, Giulia and Perna, Rosalba and de Cesare, Giovanni and Stella, Luigi. Magnetar Central Engines in Gamma-Ray Bursts Follow the Universal Relation of Accreting Magnetic Stars. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2023. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acccec. arXiv:2305.00029

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    GLADE: A galaxy catalogue for multimessenger searches in the advanced gravitational-wave detector era

    D \'a lya, Gergely and Galg \'o czi, G \'a bor and Dobos, L \'a szl \'o and Frei, Zsolt and Heng, Ik Siong and Macas, Ronaldas and Messenger, Christopher and Raffai, P \'e ter and de Souza, Rafael S. GLADE: A galaxy catalogue for multimessenger searches in the advanced gravitational-wave detector era. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2018. doi:10.1093/mnras/st...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  64. [64]

    and others

    D'Avanzo, P. and others. The evolution of the X-ray afterglow emission of GW 170817/ GRB 170817A in XMM-Newton observations. Astron. Astrophys. 2018. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832664. arXiv:1801.06164

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  65. [65]

    and others

    Soares-Santos, M. and others. The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. I. Discovery of the Optical Counterpart Using the Dark Energy Camera. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2017. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa9059. arXiv:1710.05459

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  66. [66]

    and others

    Scolnic, D. and others. How Many Kilonovae Can Be Found in Past, Present, and Future Survey Data Sets?. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2018. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa9d82. arXiv:1710.05845

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  67. [67]

    and others

    Bom, Clecio R. and others. Designing an Optimal Kilonova Search Using DECam for Gravitational-wave Events. Astrophys. J. 2024. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0462. arXiv:2302.04878

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  68. [68]

    Constraining Binary Neutron Star Populations using Short Gamma-Ray Burst Observations

    De Santis, Alessio Ludovico and Ronchini, Samuele and Santoliquido, Filippo and Branchesi, Marica. Constraining Binary Neutron Star Populations using Short Gamma-Ray Burst Observations. 2026. arXiv:2602.13391

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  69. [69]

    and Ott, C

    Dessart, L. and Ott, C. D. and Burrows, A. and Rosswog, S. and Livne, E. Neutrino signatures and the neutrino-driven wind in Binary Neutron Star Mergers. Astrophys. J. 2009. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/690/2/1681. arXiv:0806.4380

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  70. [70]

    Distinguishing prompt-collapse binary neutron star mergers from binary black Holes: Tidal effects and remnant properties

    Dhani, Arnab and Camilletti, Alessandro and Radice, David and Kashyap, Rahul and Sathyaprakash, Bangalore and Logoteta, Domenico and Perego, Albino. Distinguishing prompt-collapse binary neutron star mergers from binary black Holes: Tidal effects and remnant properties. Phys. Rev. D. 2025. doi:10.1103/2yng-9l9s

    work page doi:10.1103/2yng-9l9s 2025

  71. [71]

    Gravitational waves and mass ejecta from binary neutron star mergers: Effect of the stars' rotation

    Dietrich, Tim and Bernuzzi, Sebastiano and Ujevic, Maximiliano and Tichy, Wolfgang. Gravitational waves and mass ejecta from binary neutron star mergers: Effect of the stars' rotation. Phys. Rev. D. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.044045. arXiv:1611.07367

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  72. [72]

    and Pang, Peter T

    Dietrich, Tim and Coughlin, Michael W. and Pang, Peter T. H. and Bulla, Mattia and Heinzel, Jack and Issa, Lina and Tews, Ingo and Antier, Sarah. Multimessenger constraints on the neutron-star equation of state and the Hubble constant. Science. 2020. doi:10.1126/science.abb4317. arXiv:2002.11355

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  73. [73]

    and Murphy, T

    Dobie, D. and Murphy, T. and Kaplan, D. L. and Ghosh, S. and Bannister, K. W. and Hunstead, R. W. An optimised gravitational wave follow-up strategy with the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder. Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 2019. doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.9. arXiv:1903.01481

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  74. [74]

    and Hotokezaka, Kenta and Ataides, Juan Pablo Bonilla and Mahony, Elizabeth K

    Dobie, Dougal and Murphy, Tara and Kaplan, David L. and Hotokezaka, Kenta and Ataides, Juan Pablo Bonilla and Mahony, Elizabeth K. and Sadler, Elaine M. Radio afterglows from compact binary coalescences: prospects for next-generation telescopes. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2021. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1468. arXiv:2105.08933

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  75. [75]

    Evolution and afterglow emission of gamma-ray burst jets from binary neutron star mergers

    Dreas, Emma and Salafia, Om Sharan and Pavan, Andrea and Ciolfi, Riccardo and Celotti, Annalisa. Evolution and afterglow emission of gamma-ray burst jets from binary neutron star mergers. 2026. arXiv:2601.08714

    arXiv 2026

  76. [76]

    Drout, M. R. and others. Light Curves of the Neutron Star Merger GW170817/SSS17a: Implications for R-Process Nucleosynthesis. Science. 2017. doi:10.1126/science.aaq0049. arXiv:1710.05443

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  77. [77]

    A systematic study of binary neutron star merger rate density history using simulated gravitational wave and short gamma-ray burst observations

    Du, Yun-Fei and Yorgancioglu, Emre Seyit and Yi, Shu-Xu and Cao, Tian-Yong and Zhang, Shuang-Nan. A systematic study of binary neutron star merger rate density history using simulated gravitational wave and short gamma-ray burst observations. 2025. arXiv:2507.04019

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  78. [78]

    and Quataert, Eliot and Kasen, Daniel and Klion, Hannah

    Duffell, Paul C. and Quataert, Eliot and Kasen, Daniel and Klion, Hannah. Jet Dynamics in Compact Object Mergers: GW170817 Likely had a Successful Jet. Astrophys. J. 2018. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aae084. arXiv:1806.10616

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  79. [79]

    gwfish: A simulation software to evaluate parameter-estimation capabilities of gravitational-wave detector networks

    Dupletsa, Ulyana and Harms, Jan and Banerjee, Biswajit and Branchesi, Marica and Goncharov, Boris and Maselli, Andrea and Oliveira, Ana Carolina Silva and Ronchini, Samuele and Tissino, Jacopo. gwfish: A simulation software to evaluate parameter-estimation capabilities of gravitational-wave detector networks. Astron. Comput. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2022...

    arXiv 2023

  80. [80]

    and Paschalidis, Vasileios and Pretorius, Frans and Tsokaros, Antonios

    East, William E. and Paschalidis, Vasileios and Pretorius, Frans and Tsokaros, Antonios. Binary neutron star mergers: Effects of spin and post-merger dynamics. Phys. Rev. D. 2019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.124042. arXiv:1906.05288

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

Showing first 80 references.