List of Tables

Table 1:
Estimated initial and advanced LIGO rates for BH-NS and NS-NS mergers from population synthesis calculations and other methods. The methods used are, in order, empirical constraints from the observed sample of binary pulsars (‘Empirical’), constraints on the combined NS-NS/BH-NS merger rate assuming that they are the progenitors of short-hard gamma-ray bursts (‘SGRBs’), population synthesis models calibrated to the star formation rate in the Milky Way (‘Pop. Synth. – SFR’), and population synthesis calibrated against the observed Galactic binary pulsar sample (‘Pop. Synth. – NS-NS’). We note that observations of binary pulsars do not yield constraints for BH-NS binaries. SGRB observations may produce constraints on NS-NS merger rates, BH-NS, merger rates, or both, depending on which sources are the true progenitors, but this remains unclear. Therefore, the table quotes results assuming a roughly equal split between the two. The official review of these results and their implications by the LIGO/Virgo Scientific Collaborations may be found in [1].
Table 2:
A summary of various studies focusing on QE sequences of NS-NS binaries. Please refer to Section 6 for a discussion of papers that focus on dynamical simulations instead. Gravitational schemes include Newtonian gravity (‘Newt.’), lowest-order post-Newtonian theory (‘PN’), conformal thin sandwich (‘CTS’) including modified forms of the spatial metric (‘Mod. CTS’), and waveless/near-zone helical symmetry techniques. Numerical methods include ellipsoidal formalisms (‘Ellips.’), self-consistent fields (‘SCF’), numerical grids (‘Grid’), multigrids, and multipatch, Green’s function techniques (‘Green’s’), spectral methods (‘Spectral’), or SPH relaxation (‘SPH’). With regard to EOS models, ‘WD’ refers to the exact white dwarf EOS assuming a cold degenerate electron gas [64]. The ‘Physical’ EOS models include the FPS [222], SLy [83], and APR [3] nuclear EOS models, along with their parameterized approximations and other physically motivated models. The compactness 𝒞 = M ∕R refers to the value for a NS in isolation before it is placed in a binary, and plays no role in Newtonian physics. The mass ratio q = M2 ∕M1 is defined to be less than unity, and ‘spin’ refers to either synchronized or irrotational configurations.
Table 3:
A summary of groups reporting NS-NS merger calculation results. The asterisk for the KT collaboration’s MHD column indicates that they have used an MHD-based code for other projects, but not yet for NS-NS merger simulations. Gravitational formalisms include full GR, assumed to be implemented using the BSSN decomposition except for the HAD collaborations’s GHG approach, the CF approximation, or Newtonian gravity. Microphysical treatments include physically motivated EOS models or quark-matter EOS and neutrino leakage schemes.
Table 4:
A summary of Full GR NS-NS merger calculations. EOS models include polytropes, piecewise polytropes (PP), as well as physically motivated models including cold SLy [83], FPS [222], and APR [3] models to which one adds an ideal-gas hot component to reflect shock heating, as well as the Shen [268, 267] finite temperature model and EOS that include Hyperonic contributions [264]. “Co/Ir” indicates that both corotating and irrotational models were considered; “BHB” indicates that BH binary mergers were also presented, including both BH-BH and BH-NS types, “ν-leak” indicates a neutrino leakage scheme was included in the calculation, “GH” indicates calculations were performed using the GHG formalism rather than BSSN, “non-QE” indicates superposition initial data were used, including cases where eccentric configurations were studied (“Eccen.”); “MHD” indicates MHD was used to evolve the system.