The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
WHAT IS THE MOST PROMISING ELECTROMAGNETIC COUNTERPART OF A NEUTRON STAR BINARY MERGER?
Open accessAbstract
The final inspiral of double neutron star and neutron-star–black-hole binaries are likely to be detected by advanced networks of ground-based gravitational wave (GW) interferometers. Maximizing the science returns from such a discovery will require the identification of an electromagnetic counterpart. Here we critically evaluate and compare several possible counterparts, including short-duration gamma-ray bursts (SGRBs), "orphan" optical and radio afterglows, and day-long optical transients powered by the radioactive decay of heavy nuclei synthesized in the merger ejecta ("kilonovae"). We assess the promise of each counterpart in terms of four "Cardinal Virtues": detectability, high fraction, identifiability, and positional accuracy. Taking into account the search strategy for typical error regions of tens of square degrees, we conclude that SGRBs are the most useful to confirm the cosmic origin of a few GW events, and to test the association with neutron star mergers. However, for the more ambitious goal of localizing and obtaining redshifts for a large sample of GW events, kilonovae are instead preferred. Off-axis optical afterglows are detectable for at most tens of percent of events, while radio afterglows are promising only for energetic relativistic ejecta in a high-density medium. Our main recommendations are: (1) an all-sky gamma-ray satellite is essential for temporal coincidence detections, and for GW searches of gamma-ray-triggered events; (2) the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope should adopt a one-day cadence follow-up strategy, ideally with 0.5 hr per pointing to cover GW error regions; and (3) radio searches should focus on the relativistic case, which requires observations for a few months.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
LIGO: The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory
Abramovici, A., Althouse, W. E., Drever, R. W. P., Gürsel, Y., Kawamura, S., Raab, F. J., Shoemaker, D., Sievers, L., Spero, R. E., Thorne, K. S., et al. (1992) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.256.5055.325 · Cited by 2,244
Nucleosynthesis, neutrino bursts and γ-rays from coalescing neutron stars
Eichler, D., Livio, M., Piran, T., & Schramm, D. N. (1989) · Nature · doi:10.1038/340126a0 · Cited by 2,107
Gamma-ray bursters at cosmological distances
Paczynski, B. (1986) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/184740 · Cited by 1,543
Determining the Hubble constant from gravitational wave observations
Schutz, B. F. (1986) · Nature · doi:10.1038/323310a0 · Cited by 1,395
Gamma-ray bursts as the death throes of massive binary stars
Narayan, R., Paczynski, B., & Piran, T. (1992) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/186493 · Cited by 1,335
Metzger, B. D., Martínez-Pinedo, G., Darbha, S., Quataert, E., Arcones, A., Kasen, D., Thomas, R., Nugent, P., Panov, I. V., & Zinner, N. T. (2010) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16864.x · Cited by 1,180
Self-citationAbadie, J., Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abernathy, M., Accadia, T., Acernese, F., Adams, C., Adhikari, R., Ajith, P., Allen, B., et al. (2010) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/0264-9381/27/17/173001 · Cited by 1,143
The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshift z= 0.1
Blanton, M. R., Hogg, D. W., Bahcall, N. A., Brinkmann, J., Britton, M., Connolly, A. J., Csabai, I., Fukugita, M., Loveday, J., Meiksin, A., et al. (2003) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/375776 · Cited by 1,111
[CLC][ITAL]r[/ITAL][/CLC]-Process in Neutron Star Mergers
Freiburghaus, C., Rosswog, S., & Thielemann, F.-K. (1999) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/312343 · Cited by 818
Using Gravitational‐Wave Standard Sirens
Holz, D. E., & Hughes, S. A. (2005) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/431341 · Cited by 777
Cited by
LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products
Ivezić, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., Abel, B., Acosta, E., Allsman, R., Alonso, D., AlSayyad, Y., Anderson, S. F., Andrew, J., et al. (2019) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c · Cited by 4,357
“LSST’s unique ability to characterize the faint variable sky over large areas will be important not only for detection of associated sources but for eliminating potential false positives (Nissanke, Kasliwal & Georgieva 2013; Metzger & Berger 2012).”
BackgroundBarnes, J., & Kasen, D. (2013) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/1/18 · Cited by 579
Villar, V. A., Guillochon, J., Berger, E., Metzger, B. D., Cowperthwaite, P. S., Nicholl, M., Alexander, K. D., Blanchard, P. K., Chornock, R., Eftekhari, T., et al. (2017) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa9c84 · Cited by 574
Self-citationBauswein, A., Goriely, S., & Janka, H.-T. (2013) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/773/1/78 · Cited by 567
Fong, W., Berger, E., Margutti, R., & Zauderer, B. A. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/815/2/102 · Cited by 532
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Metzger, B. D., & Berger, E.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 2012-01-24
- Volume
- 746
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 48
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2066853648
- Cited by
- 521
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 26.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: WHAT IS THE MOST PROMISING ELECTROMAGNETIC COUNTERPART OF A NEUTRON STAR BINARY MERGER? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0004-637x/746/1/48
- The paper
- Metzger, B. D., & Berger, E. (2012). WHAT IS THE MOST PROMISING ELECTROMAGNETIC COUNTERPART OF A NEUTRON STAR BINARY MERGER? The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637x/746/1/48
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
