AG-2026.05-224·astro-ph.CO·cross-listed: gr-qc
Primordial black holes in excursion set theory: Formation probabilities, mass functions, and window functions
Authors
- Hayami Iizuka
- Daiki Saito
- Koki Tokeshi
Abstract
We study the mass function of primordial black holes (PBHs) within the excursion-set theory, in which the response of the stochastic density contrast to the variation of the coarse-graining scale is described by colored noises. For several window functions often used in the literature, we investigate how this choice affects the formation probability as well as the resultant mass function of PBHs. It is found that the low-mass tail of the mass function differs from the one predicted from Carr's formula. The difference comes from the prevalence of correlated noises, by which degeneracy of the formation probabilities ceases to exist. Nevertheless, Carr's formula still provides a practical estimation in the vicinity of the characteristic mass scale, as long as a smooth window function in Fourier space is used.
Submitted
21 May 20262 weeks ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2605.22789
Summary
Primordial black holes form from density fluctuations in the early universe; this work shows that how we mathematically smooth those fluctuations significantly affects predictions of black hole masses, especially for lighter ones.
- The choice of 'window function'—a mathematical tool for smoothing density variations across different scales—changes how many primordial black holes form and what masses they end up with.
- Colored noise (correlated wiggles in the density field) breaks a degeneracy that Carr's classic formula relies on, altering predictions for low-mass black holes in particular.
- Despite these corrections, Carr's formula remains useful for estimating black hole populations near the characteristic mass if researchers choose smooth window functions.
curious · generated by claude-haiku-4-5
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.