This paper presents updated estimates of source parameters for GW150914, a binary black-hole coalescence event detected by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) in 2015 [Abbott , 061102 (2016).]. Abbott [ , 241102 (2016).] presented parameter estimation of the source using a 13-dimensional, phenomenological precessing-spin model (precessing IMRPhenom) and an 11-dimensional nonprecessing effective-one-body (EOB) model calibrated to numerical-relativity simulations, which forces spin alignment (nonprecessing EOBNR). Here, we present new results that include a 15-dimensional precessing-spin waveform model (precessing EOBNR) developed within the EOB formalism. We find good agreement with the parameters estimated previously [Abbott , 241102 (2016).], and we quote updated component masses of <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><a:mrow><a:msubsup><a:mrow><a:mn>35</a:mn></a:mrow><a:mrow><a:mo>−</a:mo><a:mn>3</a:mn></a:mrow><a:mrow><a:mo>+</a:mo><a:mn>5</a:mn></a:mrow></a:msubsup></a:mrow></a:math> <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><c:mrow><c:msub><c:mrow><c:mi mathvariant="normal">M</c:mi></c:mrow><c:mrow><c:mo stretchy="false">⊙</c:mo></c:mrow></c:msub></c:mrow></c:math> and <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><g:mn>3</g:mn><g:msubsup><g:mn>0</g:mn><g:mrow><g:mo>−</g:mo><g:mn>4</g:mn></g:mrow><g:mrow><g:mo>+</g:mo><g:mn>3</g:mn></g:mrow></g:msubsup></g:math> <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><i:msub><i:mi mathvariant="normal">M</i:mi><i:mo stretchy="false">⊙</i:mo></i:msub></i:math> (where errors correspond to 90% symmetric credible intervals). We also present slightly tighter constraints on the dimensionless spin magnitudes of the two black holes, with a primary spin estimate <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><m:mo><</m:mo><m:mn>0.65</m:mn></m:math> and a secondary spin estimate <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><o:mo><</o:mo><o:mn>0.75</o:mn></o:math> at 90% probability. Abbott [ , 241102 (2016).] estimated the systematic parameter-extraction errors due to waveform-model uncertainty by combining the posterior probability densities of precessing IMRPhenom and nonprecessing EOBNR. Here, we find that the two precessing-spin models are in closer agreement, suggesting that these systematic errors are smaller than previously quoted. Published by the American Physical Society 2016
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abbott et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: