Exploiting Newton-factorized, 2PN-accurate, waveform multipoles in effective-one-body models for spin-aligned noncircularized binaries

Abstract

We present a new approach to factorize and resum the post-Newtonian (PN) waveform for generic equatorial motion to be used within effective-one-body (EOB) based waveform models. The new multipolar waveform factorization improves previous prescriptions in that: (i) the generic Newtonian contribution is factored out from each multipole; (ii) the circular part is factored out and resummed using standard EOB methods and (iii) the residual, 2PN-accurate, noncircular part, and in particular the tail contribution, is additionally resummed using Pad\'e approximants. The resulting waveform is validated in the extreme-mass-ratio limit by comparisons with nine (mostly nonspinning) numerical waveforms either from eccentric inspirals, with eccentricities up to e=0.9, or dynamical captures . The resummation of the noncircular tail contribution is found essential to obtain excellent (0.05~rad at periastron for e=0.9) analytical/numerical agreement and to considerably improve the prescription with just the Newtonian prefactor. In the comparable mass case, the new 2PN waveform shows only a marginal improvement over the previous Newtonian factorization, though yielding maximal unfaithfulness 10-3 with the 28 publicly available numerical relativity simulations with eccentricity up to 0.3 (except for a single outlier that grazes 10-2). We finally use test-particle data to validate the waveform factorization proposed by Khalil et al.~[Phys.~Rev.~104 (2021) 2, 024046] and conclude that its amplitude can be considered reliable (though less accurate, 6\% fractional difference versus 1.5\% of our method) only up to eccentricities 0.3.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…