Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
New Riemann solver improves accuracy of gravitational waveforms from binary neutron star mergers, indicating better modeling capabilities.
We report the performance of a newly implemented fourth-order accurate finite-volume Harten-Lax-van Leer-contact Riemann solver in the adaptive-mesh-refinement numerical relativity code -. First, we validate our implementation in one-dimensional special relativistic hydrodynamics tests, i.e., a simple wave and shock tube test, which have analytic solutions. We demonstrate that the fourth-order convergence is achieved for the smooth flow, which cannot be achieved in our original second-order accurate finite-volume Riemann solver. We also show that our new solver is robust for the strong shock wave emergence problem. Second, we validate the implementation in a dynamical spacetime by demonstrating that - perfectly preserves the <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><a:mi>π</a:mi></a:math> symmetry without imposing the <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><c:mi>π</c:mi></c:math> symmetry in a short-term (<e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><e:mo>∼</e:mo><e:mn>20</e:mn><e:mtext> </e:mtext><e:mtext> </e:mtext><e:mi>ms</e:mi></e:math> in the inspiral and subsequent postmerger phase) nonspinning equal-mass binary neutron star merger simulations. Finally, we quantify the accuracy of <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><g:mo>≈</g:mo><g:mn>28</g:mn></g:math> cycle inspiral gravitational waveforms from binary neutron star mergers by conducting a resolution study with <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><i:mo>≈</i:mo><i:mn>78</i:mn></i:math>, 94, 118, and 135 m. We find that the fourth-order accurate Riemann solver achieves the convergence order <k:math xmlns:k="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><k:mo>≈</k:mo><k:mn>2.1</k:mn><k:mo>±</k:mo><k:mn>0.05</k:mn><k:mi>–</k:mi><k:mn>2.4</k:mn><k:mo>±</k:mo><k:mn>0.27</k:mn></k:math>, i.e., slightly evolving with time, in the inspiral gravitational wave phase, while the second-order accurate Riemann solver achieves the convergence order <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><m:mo>≈</m:mo><m:mn>2.0</m:mn><m:mo>±</m:mo><m:mn>0.5</m:mn></m:math>. The residual phase error towards the continuum limit at the merger is <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><o:mn>0.27</o:mn><o:mo>±</o:mo><o:mn>0.07</o:mn><o:mtext> </o:mtext><o:mtext> </o:mtext><o:mi>rad</o:mi></o:math> and <q:math xmlns:q="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><q:mn>0.58</q:mn><q:mo>±</q:mo><q:mn>0.22</q:mn><q:mtext> </q:mtext><q:mtext> </q:mtext><q:mi>rad</q:mi></q:math> out of a total phase of <s:math xmlns:s="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><s:mo>≈</s:mo><s:mn>176</s:mn><s:mtext> </s:mtext><s:mtext> </s:mtext><s:mi>rad</s:mi></s:math>, respectively, for the fourth- and second-order accurate Riemann solver.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kenta Kiuchi (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: