pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.12542 · v1 · pith:VUQEKWHYnew · submitted 2026-06-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · gr-qc

Implementation of multi-grid Poisson solver in numerical relativity and its application to gravitational collapse of massive star

Kenta Kiuchi , Hirotada Okawa This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 08:27 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE gr-qc
keywords multi-grid Poisson solvernumerical relativitygravitational collapsemassive starconstraint-preserving regridADM mass conservationneutron starblack hole
0
0 comments X

The pith

A multi-grid Poisson solver for numerical relativity preserves baryonic mass to O(10^{-3}) percent and ADM quantities to O(10^{-2})--O(10^{-1}) percent during collapse of a 9-solar-mass star up to core bounce.

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

The paper develops a grid-based multi-grid Poisson solver for numerical relativity and tests it on initial-value problems involving two-puncture black holes, static neutron stars, and rotating neutron stars. It then embeds the solver inside a constraint-preserving regrid scheme and runs a full neutrino-radiation hydrodynamics simulation of a massive star collapsing to core bounce. The central demonstration is that key conserved quantities remain accurate at the reported levels even as the grid is refined during the dynamical phase. A reader would care because accurate, stable solution of the Poisson equation is required at every time step in any relativistic simulation that must track gravity, hydrodynamics, and radiation together.

Core claim

We develop a new grid-based multi-grid Poisson solver in numerical relativity. We report the performance of the multi-grid Poisson solver in the initial value problems for two-puncture black holes, a static spherical neutron star, a uniformly rotating neutron star in equilibrium, and a gravitationally collapsing massive star. As a demonstration, we conduct a numerical-relativity neutrino-radiation-transfer hydrodynamics simulation of the gravitational collapse of the 9M_sun massive star up to the core bounce. During the simulation, we employ the constraint-preserving regrid prescription with the newly developed multi-grid Poisson solver to improve the resolution. It shows that the baryonic m

What carries the argument

The multi-grid Poisson solver embedded inside the constraint-preserving regrid prescription, which supplies the gravitational potential at each step of the dynamical evolution.

If this is right

  • The solver achieves usable accuracy on two-puncture black-hole initial data.
  • It reproduces equilibrium configurations of both static and uniformly rotating neutron stars.
  • Baryonic mass stays conserved to O(10^{-3}) percent through the entire collapse run.
  • ADM mass and ADM-like angular momentum stay conserved to O(10^{-2})--O(10^{-1}) percent up to core bounce.
  • The same regrid-plus-solver combination supports neutrino-radiation hydrodynamics without destabilizing the evolution.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The method could be ported to other numerical-relativity codes that already use adaptive or regridding techniques.
  • If the same accuracy holds for longer post-bounce evolution, the solver would enable extended supernova simulations with controlled constraint violations.
  • Conservation of additional quantities such as linear momentum could be checked in the same framework to test broader applicability.

Load-bearing premise

The multi-grid Poisson solver maintains the required accuracy and stability when embedded inside the constraint-preserving regrid prescription during the dynamical evolution of a collapsing star.

What would settle it

Running the same 9-solar-mass collapse simulation and measuring ADM mass or angular momentum errors larger than O(10^{-1}) percent at core bounce would show the claimed conservation levels are not achieved.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.12542 by Hirotada Okawa, Kenta Kiuchi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: plots the L1 norm for the deviation from the exact solution in this problem. It shows almost second￾order convergence, validating the correctness of our im￾plementation. 101 102 103 N 10−5 10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 || φ − φexact|| 1 ∝ N−1.98081 Newtonian constant density (Rs = 2) FIG. 1. The L1 norm of the error from the exact solution in the Newtonian constant-density sphere problem. III. VALIDATION IN NUMERICA… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (Left) The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The Hamiltonian and Momentum constraints as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (Left) Central maximum rest-mass density as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The baryonic mass conservation error as a function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Left) The ADM mass conservation error as a function of time. (Right) The ADM-like angular momentum conservation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The required CPU time to achieve the convergence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Schematic picture for restriction/prolongation in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We develop a new grid-based multi-grid Poisson solver in numerical relativity. We report the performance of the multi-grid Poisson solver in the initial value problems for two-puncture black holes, a static spherical neutron star, a uniformly rotating neutron star in equilibrium, and a gravitationally collapsing massive star. As a demonstration, we conduct a numerical-relativity neutrino-radiation-transfer hydrodynamics simulation of the gravitational collapse of the $9M_\odot$ massive star in Ref.~\cite{Aguilera-Dena:2020mfh} up to the core bounce. During the simulation, we employ the constraint-preserving regird prescription with the newly developed multi-grid Poisson solver to improve the resolution. It shows that the baryonic mass, the Arnowit-Deser-Misner (ADM) mass, and the ADM-like angular momentum are, respectively, preserved with $O(10^{-3})\%$ and $O(10^{-2})$--$O(10^{-1})$\% accuracy.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the implementation of a grid-based multi-grid Poisson solver for numerical relativity. It reports performance on initial-value problems for two-puncture black holes, a static spherical neutron star, and a uniformly rotating neutron star in equilibrium. As the main application, the solver is embedded in a neutrino-radiation hydrodynamics simulation of the gravitational collapse of a 9 solar-mass star up to core bounce, using a constraint-preserving regrid prescription; the paper states that baryonic mass is conserved to O(10^{-3})% and ADM mass plus ADM-like angular momentum to O(10^{-2})--O(10^{-1})%.

Significance. If the reported conservation levels are robustly verified, the work supplies a practical multi-grid Poisson solver that can be paired with adaptive regridding in dynamical NR simulations, which is relevant for core-collapse supernova modeling. The explicit use of the solver inside a production collapse run with regridding is a concrete demonstration, though its strength depends on the missing verification steps noted below.

major comments (2)
  1. [abstract and collapse-simulation results] Abstract (final paragraph) and collapse-simulation section: the central claim that the multi-grid solver maintains the quoted conservation accuracies when combined with the constraint-preserving regrid during dynamical evolution rests on a single production run; the equilibrium tests (two-puncture BHs, static/rotating NS) contain no regridding or time evolution, and no isolated test of solver accuracy/stability under regrid operations is described.
  2. [performance reports for IVPs and collapse simulation] Results on initial-value problems and collapse run: conservation accuracies are stated without accompanying convergence tests, grid-resolution series, error-bar quantification, or direct comparison against analytic solutions or a reference Poisson solver, preventing independent assessment of the multi-grid method's order and truncation error.
minor comments (1)
  1. [abstract] Notation for the ADM-like angular momentum should be defined explicitly when first introduced.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. We respond point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [abstract and collapse-simulation results] Abstract (final paragraph) and collapse-simulation section: the central claim that the multi-grid solver maintains the quoted conservation accuracies when combined with the constraint-preserving regrid during dynamical evolution rests on a single production run; the equilibrium tests (two-puncture BHs, static/rotating NS) contain no regridding or time evolution, and no isolated test of solver accuracy/stability under regrid operations is described.

    Authors: The equilibrium tests are static and do not incorporate regridding or evolution. The collapse simulation is a single production run that integrates the multi-grid solver with the constraint-preserving regrid. Conservation accuracies are measured directly from this run. We agree that an isolated test of the solver under regrid operations alone is not presented. In revision we will clarify in the abstract and collapse section that the reported accuracies are obtained from the integrated dynamical simulation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [performance reports for IVPs and collapse simulation] Results on initial-value problems and collapse run: conservation accuracies are stated without accompanying convergence tests, grid-resolution series, error-bar quantification, or direct comparison against analytic solutions or a reference Poisson solver, preventing independent assessment of the multi-grid method's order and truncation error.

    Authors: Conservation figures are taken from the single production run. The manuscript does not include a resolution series, error bars, or comparisons to analytic/reference solutions. The multi-grid solver follows the standard second-order convergence of the underlying finite-difference discretization. We will add a short discussion of the expected order and how conservation is computed in the revised manuscript. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; implementation results are measured outcomes

full rationale

The paper reports development of a multi-grid Poisson solver and its performance via direct numerical tests (two-puncture BHs, static/rotating NS equilibria, and a 9Msun collapse simulation with regridding). Conservation figures (baryonic mass O(10^{-3})%, ADM mass/angular momentum O(10^{-2})--O(10^{-1})%) are simulation outputs, not fitted parameters or self-defined quantities. No equations reduce results to inputs by construction, no load-bearing self-citations, and no ansatz or uniqueness claims imported circularly. The work is a self-contained implementation report whose central claims rest on external numerical verification rather than tautological redefinitions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides no equations, parameters, or postulates; therefore no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be identified.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5708 in / 1205 out tokens · 21014 ms · 2026-06-27T08:27:26.725946+00:00 · methodology

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

83 extracted references · 29 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    The conver- gence order is≈1.6 for the Hamiltonian constraint, and ≈1.1 for the Momentum constraint

    Figure 3 plots the Hamiltonian constraint and the Momentum constraint as a function ofN. The conver- gence order is≈1.6 for the Hamiltonian constraint, and ≈1.1 for the Momentum constraint. Likely in the uni- formly rotating neutron star problem, the source termS i in Eqs. (3.9)–(3.10), which is discontinuous at the bound- ary between different chemical c...

  2. [2]

    Jacobi method The Jacobi method is a classical iterative scheme for solving discretized equations. For a nonlinear equation 8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 t [s] 10−5 10−4 10−3 10−2 |MADM/MADM(0) − 1| ∆x(9) = 3.68 km ∆x(14) = 0.115 km ∆x(9) = 4.98 km ∆x(14) = 0.156125 km ∆x(9) = 7.56 km ∆x(14) = 0.23625 km 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 t [s] 10−5 10−4 10−3 10−2 |...

  3. [3]

    W4 method In contrast, the W4 method incorporates the depen- dence of the nonlinear source term on the solution more effectively. The W4 iteration can be written in a general form as x(k+1) =x (k) +ωXp (k), p(k+1) = (1−2ω)p (k) −Y b(x(k))−Ax (k) ,(A3) whereXandYare matrices that are ideally derived from the Jacobian matrix. In this setup, we chooseX=I and...

  4. [4]

    The restriction operator transfers information from the finer grid to the coarser gridx H =I H h xh

    Restriction and Prolongation Operators In this subsection, we define the restriction and pro- longation operators used in our code. The restriction operator transfers information from the finer grid to the coarser gridx H =I H h xh. Specifi- cally, variables on the coarser grid are obtained using a weighted averaging scheme by applying a tensor-product st...

  5. [5]

    D. R. Aguilera-Dena, N. Langer, J. Antoniadis, and B. M¨ uller, Astrophys. J.901, 114 (2020), arXiv:2008.09132 [astro-ph.SR]

    arXiv 2020

  6. [6]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  7. [7]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo, Fermi GBM, INTEGRAL, IceCube, AstroSat Cadmium Zinc Telluride Imager Team, IPN, Insight-Hxmt, ANTARES, Swift, AGILE Team, 1M2H Team, Dark Energy Camera GW-EM, DES, DLT40, GRAWITA, Fermi-LAT, ATCA, ASKAP, Las Cumbres Observatory Group, OzGrav, DWF (Deeper Wider Faster Program), AST3, CAAS- TRO, VINROUGE, MASTER,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  9. [9]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. X9, 011001 (2019), arXiv:1805.11579 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 161101 (2018), arXiv:1805.11581 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [11]

    Kiuchi, S

    K. Kiuchi, S. Fujibayashi, K. Hayashi, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 011401 (2023), arXiv:2211.07637 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Kiuchi, A

    K. Kiuchi, A. Reboul-Salze, M. Shibata, and Y. Sekiguchi, Nature Astron.8, 298 (2024), arXiv:2306.15721 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Hayashi, K

    K. Hayashi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 211407 (2025), arXiv:2410.10958 [astro-ph.HE]. 10

    arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Fujibayashi, K

    S. Fujibayashi, K. Kiuchi, S. Wanajo, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Astrophys. J.942, 39 (2023), arXiv:2205.05557 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    Fujibayashi, M

    S. Fujibayashi, M. Shibata, S. Wanajo, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and Y. Sekiguchi, Phys. Rev. D101, 083029 (2020), arXiv:2001.04467 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    Fujibayashi, S

    S. Fujibayashi, S. Wanajo, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Astrophys. J.901, 122 (2020), arXiv:2007.00474 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Fujibayashi, M

    S. Fujibayashi, M. Shibata, S. Wanajo, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and Y. Sekiguchi, Phys. Rev. D102, 123014 (2020), arXiv:2009.03895 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Fujibayashi, K

    S. Fujibayashi, K. Kiuchi, N. Nishimura, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Astrophys. J.860, 64 (2018), arXiv:1711.02093 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  19. [19]

    Shibata, S

    M. Shibata, S. Fujibayashi, and Y. Sekiguchi, Phys. Rev. D103, 043022 (2021), arXiv:2102.01346 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  20. [20]

    Shibata, S

    M. Shibata, S. Fujibayashi, and Y. Sekiguchi, Phys. Rev. D104, 063026 (2021), arXiv:2109.08732 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  21. [21]

    H. Gieg, R. Jaeger, M. Ujevic, and T. Dietrich, (2026), arXiv:2604.14225 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  22. [22]

    Daszuta, S

    B. Daszuta, S. Bernuzzi, M. Jacobi, E. M. Guti´ errez, P. Hammond, W. Cook, and D. Radice, (2026), arXiv:2602.18290 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2026

  23. [23]

    E. R. Most and E. Quataert, Astrophys. J. Lett.947, L15 (2023), arXiv:2303.08062 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    Hayashi, S

    K. Hayashi, S. Fujibayashi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, (2021), arXiv:2111.04621 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  25. [25]

    Hayashi, K

    K. Hayashi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. D107, 123001 (2023), arXiv:2211.07158 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Markin, M

    I. Markin, M. Bulla, and T. Dietrich, (2026), arXiv:2601.19405 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Foucart et al., Phys

    F. Foucart et al., Phys. Rev. D99, 044008 (2019), arXiv:1812.06988 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    Boyle et al., Class

    M. Boyle et al., Class. Quant. Grav.36, 195006 (2019), arXiv:1904.04831 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2019

  29. [29]

    M. A. Scheel et al., Class. Quant. Grav.42, 195017 (2025), arXiv:2505.13378 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Fujibayashi, Y

    S. Fujibayashi, Y. Sekiguchi, M. Shibata, and S. Wanajo, Astrophys. J.956, 100 (2023), arXiv:2212.03958 [astro- ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Fujibayashi, A

    S. Fujibayashi, A. T.-L. Lam, M. Shibata, and Y. Sekiguchi, Phys. Rev. D109, 023031 (2024), arXiv:2309.02161 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Shibata, S

    M. Shibata, S. Fujibayashi, A. T.-L. Lam, K. Ioka, and Y. Sekiguchi, Phys. Rev. D109, 043051 (2024), arXiv:2309.12086 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    Shibata, S

    M. Shibata, S. Fujibayashi, S. Wanajo, K. Ioka, A. T.- L. Lam, and Y. Sekiguchi, Phys. Rev. D111, 123017 (2025), arXiv:2502.02077 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    Halevi, S

    G. Halevi, S. Shankar, P. M¨ osta, R. Haas, and E. Schnetter, Astrophys. J. Lett.991, L51 (2025), arXiv:2506.20837 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Kuroda and M

    T. Kuroda and M. Shibata, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 533, L107 (2024), arXiv:2404.02792 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Kuroda and M

    T. Kuroda and M. Shibata, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 526, 152 (2023), arXiv:2307.06192 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    A. T. L. Lam, M. Shibata, and K. Kiuchi, Phys. Rev. D 107, 043033 (2023), arXiv:2212.10891 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    Kuroda, K

    T. Kuroda, K. Kawaguchi, and M. Shibata, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.541, 1649 (2025), arXiv:2503.17082 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    P. C.-K. Cheong, T. Pitik, L. F. Longo Micchi, and D. Radice, Astrophys. J. Lett.978, L38 (2025), arXiv:2410.10938 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Combi, D

    L. Combi, D. M. Siegel, and B. D. Metzger, (2025), arXiv:2509.19799 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Foucart et al., Phys

    F. Foucart et al., Phys. Rev. D103, 064007 (2021), arXiv:2010.14518 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    Deppe et al., Class

    N. Deppe et al., Class. Quant. Grav.41, 245002 (2024), arXiv:2406.19038 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2024

  43. [43]

    Grandclement, J

    P. Grandclement, J. Comput. Phys.229, 3334 (2010), arXiv:0909.1228 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  44. [44]

    L. J. Papenfort, S. D. Tootle, P. Grandcl´ ement, E. R. Most, and L. Rezzolla, Phys. Rev. D104, 024057 (2021), arXiv:2103.09911 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    Balsara, J

    D. Balsara, J. Comp. Phys.174, 614 (2001)

    2001

  46. [46]

    Kiuchi, K

    K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. D 86, 064008 (2012), arXiv:1207.6444 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  47. [47]

    Hilditch, S

    D. Hilditch, S. Bernuzzi, M. Thierfelder, Z. Cao, W. Tichy, and B. Bruegmann, Phys. Rev. D88, 084057 (2013), arXiv:1212.2901 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  48. [48]

    Sekiguchi and M

    Y. Sekiguchi and M. Shibata, Astrophys. J.737, 6 (2011), arXiv:1009.5303 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  49. [49]

    Kuroda, T

    T. Kuroda, T. Takiwaki, and K. Kotake, Astrophys. J. Suppl.222, 20 (2016), arXiv:1501.06330 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  50. [50]

    Brandt, Mathematics of Computation31, 333 (1977)

    A. Brandt, Mathematics of Computation31, 333 (1977)

    1977

  51. [51]

    J. D. Brown and L. L. Lowe, Journal of Computational Physics209, 582 (2005)

    2005

  52. [52]

    Teunissen and R

    J. Teunissen and R. Keppens, Computer Physics Com- munications245, 106866:1 (2019)

    2019

  53. [53]

    Okawa, K

    H. Okawa, K. Fujisawa, Y. Yamamoto, R. Hirai, N. Yasu- take, H. Nagakura, and S. Yamada, Applied Numerical Mathematics183, 157 (2023)

    2023

  54. [54]

    Fujisawa, H

    K. Fujisawa, H. Okawa, Y. Yamamoto, and S. Yamada, Astrophys. J.872, 155 (2019), arXiv:1809.04358 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  55. [55]

    Okawa, K

    H. Okawa, K. Fujisawa, N. Yasutake, M. Ogata, Y. Ya- mamoto, and S. Yamada, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 520, 24 (2023), arXiv:2204.09943 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    Ogata, H

    M. Ogata, H. Okawa, K. Fujisawa, N. Yasutake, Y. Ya- mamoto, and S. Yamada, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron.521, 2561 (2023), arXiv:2210.09501 [astro-ph.SR]

    arXiv 2023

  57. [57]

    Hirai, T

    R. Hirai, T. Sato, P. Podsiadlowski, A. Vigna-Gomez, and I. Mandel, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.499, 1154 (2020), arXiv:2008.05076 [astro-ph.SR]

    arXiv 2020

  58. [58]

    Suzuki, P

    H. Suzuki, P. Gupta, H. Okawa, and K.-i. Maeda, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.500, 1645 (2020), arXiv:2006.11545 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    Brandt and B

    S. Brandt and B. Bruegmann, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 3606 (1997), arXiv:gr-qc/9703066

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  60. [60]

    C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler, Gravitation (1973)

    1973

  61. [61]

    Paschalidis and N

    V. Paschalidis and N. Stergioulas, Living Rev. Rel.20, 7 (2017), arXiv:1612.03050 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    J. W. York, Jr., Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 1350 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9810051

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  63. [63]

    H. P. Pfeiffer and J. W. York, Jr., Phys. Rev. D67, 044022 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0207095

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  64. [64]

    M¨ uther, M

    H. M¨ uther, M. Prakash, and T. L. Ainsworth, Phys. Lett. B199, 469 (1987)

    1987

  65. [65]

    Gourgoulhon, (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0703035

    E. Gourgoulhon, (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0703035

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  66. [66]

    Shibata, Numerical Relativity (World Scientific Pub- lishing Company, 2016)

    M. Shibata, Numerical Relativity (World Scientific Pub- lishing Company, 2016)

    2016

  67. [67]

    Kiuchi, L

    K. Kiuchi, L. E. Held, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shi- bata, Phys. Rev. D106, 124041 (2022), arXiv:2205.04487 11 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2022

  68. [68]

    Shibata and N

    M. Shibata and N. Takashi, Phys. Rev. D52, 5428 (1995)

    1995

  69. [69]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. D59, 024007 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9810065

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  70. [70]

    Campanelli, C

    M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y. Zlo- chower, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 111101 (2006), arXiv:gr- qc/0511048

    arXiv 2006

  71. [71]

    J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, D.-I. Choi, M. Koppitz, and J. van Meter, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 111102 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0511103

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  72. [72]

    Mignone and G

    A. Mignone and G. Bodo, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 364, 126 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0506414

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  73. [73]

    C. J. White, J. M. Stone, and C. F. Gammie, Astro- phys. J. Suppl.225, 22 (2016), arXiv:1511.00943 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  74. [74]

    Colella and P

    P. Colella and P. R. Woodward, Journal of Computa- tional Physics54, 174 (1984)

    1984

  75. [75]

    Sekiguchi, Prog

    Y. Sekiguchi, Prog. Theor. Phys.124, 331 (2010), arXiv:1009.3320 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  76. [76]

    Sekiguchi, K

    Y. Sekiguchi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 051102 (2011), arXiv:1105.2125 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  77. [77]

    Sekiguchi, K

    Y. Sekiguchi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. D91, 064059 (2015), arXiv:1502.06660 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  78. [78]

    Sekiguchi, K

    Y. Sekiguchi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, M. Shibata, and K. Taniguchi, Phys. Rev. D93, 124046 (2016), arXiv:1603.01918 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  79. [79]

    Hempel and J

    M. Hempel and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Nucl. Phys. A837, 210 (2010), arXiv:0911.4073 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  80. [80]

    F. X. Timmes and F. D. Swesty, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 126, 501 (2000)

    2000

Showing first 80 references.