AG-2024.10-316·astro-ph.HE·cross-listed: gr-qc
Probing the Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals Population Constraints with TianQin
Authors
- Hui-Min Fan
- Xiang-Yu Lyu
- Jian-dong Zhang
- Yi-Ming Hu
- Rong-Jia Yang
- Tai-Fu Feng
Abstract
Extreme-mass-ratio inspirals (EMRIs), consisting of a massive black hole and a stellar compact object, are one of the most important sources for space-borne gravitational wave detectors like TianQin. Their population study can be used to constrain astrophysical models that interpret the EMRI formation mechanisms. In this paper, as an initial attempt, we employ a parametrization method to describe the EMRI population model in the loss cone formation channel. This approach, however, can be extended to other models such as the accretion disc driven formation channel. We present the phenomenological characteristic of the MBH mass, spin, and redshift distributions. Then, we investigate the posterior distribution of the hyper-parameters that describe this population model. The optimistic results show that TianQin could recover almost all the posterior of the hyper-parameters within $1σ$ confidence interval. The hyper-parameters $α_1, α_2, b$, which describe the MBH mass distribution, could be measured with an accuracy of $46.4\%$, $12.6\%$, and $3\%$, respectively. The hyper-parameters $μ_z$, and $σ_z$, which describe the redshift distribution, could be measured with an accuracy of $15.4\%$ and $21.1\%$. With this estimation accuracy, the EMRI population characteristics can be effectively demonstrated, potentially serving as evidence for EMRI formation in the future studies. Furthermore, with an increasing number of detectable events, the parameter estimation for the hyper-parameters will improve and the confidence intervals will be narrowed.
Submitted
16 October 20241 year ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2410.12408
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.