The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
High-accuracy comparison of numerical relativity simulations with post-Newtonian expansions
Open accessAbstract
Numerical simulations of 15 orbits of an equal-mass binary black-hole system are presented. Gravitational waveforms from these simulations, covering more than 30 cycles and ending about 1.5 cycles before merger, are compared with those from quasicircular zero-spin post-Newtonian (PN) formulae. The cumulative phase uncertainty of these comparisons is about 0.05 radians, dominated by effects arising from the small residual spins of the black holes and the small residual orbital eccentricity in the simulations. Matching numerical results to PN waveforms early in the run yields excellent agreement (within 0.05 radians) over the first $\ensuremath{\sim}15$ cycles, thus validating the numerical simulation and establishing a regime where PN theory is accurate. In the last 15 cycles to merger, however, generic time-domain Taylor approximants build up phase differences of several radians. But, apparently by coincidence, one specific post-Newtonian approximant, TaylorT4 at 3.5PN order, agrees much better with the numerical simulations, with accumulated phase differences of less than 0.05 radians over the 30-cycle waveform. Gravitational-wave amplitude comparisons are also done between numerical simulations and post-Newtonian, and the agreement depends on the post-Newtonian order of the amplitude expansion: the amplitude difference is about 6%--7% for zeroth order and becomes smaller for increasing order. A newly derived 3.0PN amplitude correction improves agreement significantly ($<1%$ amplitude difference throughout most of the run, increasing to 4% near merger) over the previously known 2.5PN amplitude terms.
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
Quasilocal energy and conserved charges derived from the gravitational action
Brown, J. D., & York, J. W. (1993) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.47.1407 · Cited by 1,793
Gravitational Radiation from Post-Newtonian Sources and Inspiralling Compact Binaries
Blanchet, L. (2006) · Living Reviews in Relativity · doi:10.12942/lrr-2006-4 · Cited by 686
Cited by
Physics, Astrophysics and Cosmology with Gravitational Waves
Sathyaprakash, B. S., & Schutz, B. F. (2009) · Living Reviews in Relativity · doi:10.12942/lrr-2009-2 · Cited by 874
Gravitational Radiation from Post-Newtonian Sources and Inspiralling Compact Binaries
Blanchet, L. (2006) · Living Reviews in Relativity · doi:10.12942/lrr-2006-4 · Cited by 686
Metadata
- Authors
- Boyle, M., Brown, D. A., Kidder, L. E., Mroué, A. H., Pfeiffer, H. P., Scheel, M. A., Cook, G. B., & Teukolsky, S. A.
- Venue
- Physical Review D
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2007-12-27
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 12
- ISSN
- 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-7998
- 1550-2368
- OpenAlex
- W1977991023
- Cited by
- 391
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 26.77
- 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: High-accuracy comparison of numerical relativity simulations with post-Newtonian expansions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physrevd.76.124038
- The paper
- Boyle, M., Brown, D. A., Kidder, L. E., Mroué, A. H., Pfeiffer, H. P., Scheel, M. A., Cook, G. B., & Teukolsky, S. A. (2007). High-accuracy comparison of numerical relativity simulations with post-Newtonian expansions. Physical Review D. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.76.124038
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.