Combined table of simulated intrinsic merger rates, formation channel fractions, and model assumptions for BH–BH, BH–NS, and NS–NS binaries from over 200 population-synthesis rates. Channel fractions are evaluated at redshift z = 0. Cell shading for each channel uses its own color and scales with the fraction value. Click any column header to sort. Use the toggles to hide/show column groups. Paper column and model names link to the source paper.
| Paper | Model | Simulation Parameters | Initial Conditions | BH–BH Formation Channels | BH–NS Formation Channels | NS–NS Formation Channels | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| σ [km/s] | σ stripped | α CE | β | CE opt/pess | CE prescrip. | λ | PISN | MT stability | RMP | γ (AM loss) | AM loss mechanism | Edd. limited | f_WR | α CE notes | HG donor CE surv. | wind prescription | tidal prescription | NS remnant mass | IMF | period dist. | mass ratio dist. | f_bin | metallicity range | SFR / SFRD model | max NS mass [M☉] | σ ECSN [km/s] | Total Rate [Gpc⁻³yr⁻¹] | CHE (no MT) | classic SMT (SMT+SMT) | other without CE | classic CE (SMT+CE) | single-core CE (SCCE) | double-core CE (DCCE) | other with CE | without common envelope | with common envelope | Total Rate [Gpc⁻³yr⁻¹] | CHE (no MT) | classic SMT (SMT+SMT) | other without CE | classic CE (SMT+CE) | single-core CE (SCCE) | double-core CE (DCCE) | other with CE | without common envelope | with common envelope | Total Rate [Gpc⁻³yr⁻¹] | CHE (no MT) | classic SMT (SMT+SMT) | other without CE | classic CE (SMT+CE) | single-core CE (SCCE) | double-core CE (DCCE) | other with CE | without common envelope | with common envelope | ||
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-alpha0-2 | 265 | 30 | 0.20 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 137.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 17.9% | 82.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-alpha0-35 | 265 | 30 | 0.35 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 41.80 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 58.9% | 41.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-alpha0-5 | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 45.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 54.7% | 45.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-alpha0-75 | 265 | 30 | 0.75 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 54.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 45.4% | 54.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-alpha1 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 67.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 36.6% | 63.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-alpha2 | 265 | 30 | 2.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 59.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 41.3% | 58.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-alpha5 | 265 | 30 | 5.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 47.30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 52.0% | 48.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-eddington-1E3 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | adjusted | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 66.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 35.3% | 64.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-eddington-1E5 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | adjusted | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 44.50 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 8.3% | 91.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-eddington-1E9 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | adjusted | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 38.80 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.5% | 99.5% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-logU-SanaPrior | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 96.40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 24.0% | 76.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-logU-noRLOFatZAMS | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 103.30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 24.0% | 76.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-noRLOFatZAMS | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 87.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 36.0% | 64.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-qcrit-Belczynski | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 55.80 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 56.1% | 43.9% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bavera et al. (2021) | B21-qcrit-Claeys | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH); 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | fit based on Marchant et … | The stability of Roche-lo… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | True | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 30 (low-kick ch… | 169.70 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 70.0% | 30.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-A-fiducial | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 39.16 | — | 49.5% | 3.1% | 38.2% | 7.8% | 1.4% | — | 52.6% | 47.4% | 44.81 | — | 6.0% | 4.6% | 81.5% | 7.4% | 0.5% | — | 10.6% | 89.4% | 25.65 | — | — | 0.6% | 26.2% | 0.0% | 73.2% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 99.4% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-B-beta0-25 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | 0.25 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 33.66 | — | 43.2% | 6.0% | 46.6% | 4.2% | — | — | 49.1% | 50.9% | 17.60 | — | 41.4% | 11.1% | 32.7% | 14.8% | — | — | 52.5% | 47.5% | 20.67 | — | 0.1% | 7.2% | 92.7% | — | — | — | 7.3% | 92.7% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-C-beta0-5 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 37.60 | — | 64.0% | 4.9% | 25.5% | 5.7% | — | — | 68.9% | 31.1% | 10.48 | — | 46.6% | 21.1% | 4.6% | 27.7% | — | — | 67.7% | 32.3% | 22.00 | — | — | 1.9% | 98.0% | — | 0.0% | 0.1% | 1.9% | 98.1% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-D-beta0-75 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | 0.75 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 45.10 | — | 76.5% | 3.0% | 14.2% | 6.0% | 0.3% | — | 79.5% | 20.5% | 5.73 | — | 5.2% | 36.6% | 1.6% | 54.8% | 1.9% | — | 41.8% | 58.2% | 39.29 | — | — | 0.7% | 50.3% | — | 49.0% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 99.3% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-E-unstableBB | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 39.13 | — | 50.0% | 3.1% | 38.0% | 7.6% | 1.3% | — | 53.1% | 46.9% | 8.73 | — | 12.0% | 9.1% | 69.8% | 9.1% | 0.1% | — | 21.1% | 78.9% | 0.30 | — | — | — | 96.4% | — | 3.6% | — | — | 100.0% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-F-unstableBB-optimistic | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | optimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 89.02 | — | 24.0% | 1.7% | 70.4% | 3.4% | 0.6% | 0.0% | 25.7% | 74.3% | 36.03 | — | 42.3% | 4.9% | 48.6% | 4.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 47.2% | 52.8% | 37.25 | — | 3.3% | 1.0% | 87.8% | 0.0% | 7.8% | — | 4.3% | 95.7% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-G-alpha0-1 | 265 | 30 | 0.10 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 22.22 | — | 87.8% | 1.4% | 10.0% | 0.7% | 0.0% | — | 89.3% | 10.7% | 2.71 | — | 94.5% | 0.5% | 4.0% | 0.3% | 0.8% | — | 95.0% | 5.0% | 42.13 | — | — | 0.0% | 99.8% | — | 0.2% | — | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-H-alpha0-5 | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 33.50 | — | 58.4% | 3.9% | 30.6% | 6.7% | 0.4% | — | 62.3% | 37.7% | 11.49 | — | 24.2% | 8.6% | 54.8% | 12.2% | 0.2% | — | 32.8% | 67.2% | 12.34 | — | — | 0.7% | 90.5% | — | 8.8% | — | 0.7% | 99.3% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-I-alpha2 | 265 | 30 | 2.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 52.19 | — | 37.6% | 2.4% | 45.8% | 9.1% | 5.1% | — | 40.0% | 60.0% | 46.13 | — | 6.2% | 2.0% | 72.8% | 14.3% | 4.8% | — | 8.1% | 91.9% | 51.70 | — | — | 0.2% | 22.2% | 0.3% | 77.4% | 0.0% | 0.2% | 99.8% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-J-alpha10 | 265 | 30 | 10.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 29.91 | — | 65.2% | 0.4% | 14.8% | 13.3% | 6.3% | 0.0% | 65.6% | 34.4% | 17.82 | — | 16.7% | 0.7% | 29.4% | 50.9% | 2.3% | — | 17.4% | 82.6% | 54.81 | — | 0.1% | 0.1% | 57.4% | 9.5% | 32.6% | 0.3% | 0.2% | 99.8% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-K-optimisticCE | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | optimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 88.00 | — | 23.8% | 1.6% | 70.5% | 3.4% | 0.6% | 0.1% | 25.4% | 74.6% | 56.62 | — | 13.3% | 4.2% | 76.2% | 5.9% | 0.4% | 0.1% | 17.5% | 82.5% | 45.40 | — | 3.2% | 4.2% | 51.3% | 0.0% | 41.1% | 0.1% | 7.4% | 92.6% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-L-rapid | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) rapid… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 40.53 | — | 54.5% | 1.6% | 37.7% | 5.4% | 0.9% | — | 56.1% | 43.9% | 122.65 | — | 2.4% | 1.3% | 92.9% | 3.3% | 0.1% | — | 3.7% | 96.3% | 22.99 | — | — | 0.6% | 30.3% | 0.0% | 69.0% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 99.4% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-M-max-mNS:2 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 46.56 | — | 43.2% | 4.0% | 43.4% | 7.8% | 1.7% | — | 47.2% | 52.8% | 38.38 | — | 6.3% | 4.0% | 81.4% | 7.4% | 1.0% | — | 10.3% | 89.7% | 25.03 | — | — | 0.4% | 25.9% | 0.0% | 73.7% | 0.0% | 0.4% | 99.6% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-N-max-mNS:3 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 34.59 | — | 54.5% | 2.8% | 34.1% | 7.4% | 1.2% | — | 57.3% | 42.7% | 48.47 | — | 5.9% | 4.8% | 81.2% | 7.6% | 0.4% | — | 10.7% | 89.3% | 26.21 | — | 0.4% | 0.5% | 26.5% | 0.2% | 72.4% | 0.0% | 0.9% | 99.1% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-O-noPISN | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | no PISN | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 39.23 | — | 49.8% | 3.1% | 38.0% | 7.7% | 1.4% | — | 52.9% | 47.1% | 43.94 | — | 6.0% | 4.6% | 81.6% | 7.3% | 0.5% | — | 10.6% | 89.4% | 25.31 | — | — | 0.6% | 26.2% | 0.0% | 73.2% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 99.4% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-P-sigma:100 | 100 | 100 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 45.01 | — | 41.5% | 8.2% | 39.6% | 8.6% | 2.1% | — | 49.7% | 50.3% | 128.91 | — | 7.0% | 13.0% | 72.4% | 7.0% | 0.6% | — | 20.0% | 80.0% | 47.91 | — | — | 1.7% | 29.9% | 0.0% | 68.4% | 0.0% | 1.7% | 98.3% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-Q-sigma:30 | 30 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 51.14 | — | 33.8% | 9.4% | 46.3% | 8.4% | 2.1% | — | 43.2% | 56.8% | 249.25 | — | 1.7% | 21.8% | 71.9% | 4.3% | 0.4% | — | 23.5% | 76.5% | 118.23 | — | — | 9.6% | 61.4% | 0.0% | 29.0% | 0.0% | 9.6% | 90.4% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-R-noBHkick | 0 | 0 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 49.48 | — | 35.1% | 0.4% | 53.6% | 8.7% | 2.2% | — | 35.4% | 64.6% | 197.07 | — | 3.2% | 0.0% | 91.5% | 4.9% | 0.3% | — | 3.3% | 96.7% | 25.65 | — | — | 0.5% | 27.3% | 0.0% | 72.2% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 99.5% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-S-fWR:0-1 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 0.1 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 94.72 | — | 57.8% | 1.6% | 36.7% | 3.3% | 0.5% | — | 59.4% | 40.6% | 57.83 | — | 6.1% | 3.0% | 85.4% | 5.2% | 0.4% | — | 9.1% | 90.9% | 24.12 | — | — | 0.4% | 25.6% | 0.1% | 73.9% | 0.0% | 0.4% | 99.6% |
| Broekgaarden et al. (2022) | B22-T-fWR:5 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 5 | Standard CE energy formalism; … | No (pessimistic; HG … | Hot stars (Teff≥12500K): Vink … | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (fiducial; alter… | 30 (same Maxwel… | 11.06 | — | 30.1% | 3.0% | 48.9% | 14.6% | 3.4% | — | 33.1% | 66.9% | 8.52 | — | 15.5% | 22.9% | 29.6% | 29.7% | 2.3% | — | 38.4% | 61.6% | 23.85 | — | — | 0.8% | 72.0% | 0.0% | 27.2% | 0.0% | 0.8% | 99.2% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_0_1_beta0_25 | 265 | 30 | 0.10 | 0.25 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 71.59 | — | — | — | 7.5% | 5.4% | — | 45.2% | 41.9% | 58.1% | 45.72 | — | — | — | — | 0.8% | — | 3.6% | 95.3% | 4.7% | 38.49 | — | — | — | — | — | 10.8% | 89.2% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_0_1_beta0_5 | 265 | 30 | 0.10 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 96.21 | — | — | — | 9.0% | 3.3% | — | 25.7% | 61.9% | 38.1% | 24.10 | — | — | — | — | 3.8% | — | 4.5% | 91.7% | 8.3% | 178.31 | — | — | — | — | — | 5.7% | 94.3% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_0_1_beta0_75 | 265 | 30 | 0.10 | 0.75 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 124.18 | — | — | — | 6.3% | 5.3% | — | 9.0% | 79.4% | 20.6% | 0.79 | — | — | — | — | 47.5% | — | 26.2% | 25.2% | 74.8% | 267.68 | — | — | — | — | 0.0% | 7.5% | 92.5% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_0_5_beta0_25 | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | 0.25 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 80.32 | — | — | — | 8.5% | 16.9% | 0.0% | 39.2% | 35.4% | 64.6% | 50.40 | — | — | — | — | 17.6% | — | 4.0% | 74.0% | 26.0% | 75.70 | — | — | — | — | — | 2.1% | 97.9% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_0_5_beta0_5 | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 108.07 | — | — | — | 6.8% | 15.0% | 0.0% | 23.6% | 54.6% | 45.4% | 29.81 | — | — | — | — | 18.3% | — | 5.1% | 76.1% | 23.9% | 132.13 | — | — | — | — | — | 3.7% | 96.3% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_0_5_beta0_75 | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | 0.75 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 135.44 | — | — | — | 4.9% | 11.4% | 0.0% | 12.0% | 71.6% | 28.4% | 11.79 | — | — | — | — | 70.8% | 0.5% | 19.8% | 3.0% | 97.0% | 131.32 | — | — | — | — | 3.9% | 4.1% | 92.0% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_10_beta0_25 | 265 | 30 | 10.00 | 0.25 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 83.22 | — | — | — | 19.5% | 14.7% | 0.0% | 28.3% | 37.5% | 62.5% | 111.08 | — | — | — | — | 34.0% | — | 2.3% | 52.3% | 47.7% | 224.13 | — | — | 5.2% | 5.2% | — | 34.4% | 60.4% | 5.2% | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_10_beta0_5 | 265 | 30 | 10.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 108.80 | — | — | — | 12.3% | 12.7% | 0.0% | 19.4% | 55.7% | 44.3% | 95.62 | — | — | — | — | 27.7% | — | 1.9% | 66.4% | 33.6% | 445.10 | — | — | 7.6% | 7.6% | 13.7% | 13.5% | 65.2% | 7.6% | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_10_beta0_75 | 265 | 30 | 10.00 | 0.75 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 138.82 | — | — | — | 7.7% | 8.0% | 0.7% | 6.0% | 77.5% | 22.5% | 59.62 | — | — | — | — | 84.5% | 1.4% | 2.7% | 2.9% | 97.1% | 507.44 | — | — | 4.0% | 4.0% | 20.8% | 13.6% | 61.6% | 4.0% | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_2_beta0_25 | 265 | 30 | 2.00 | 0.25 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 154.50 | — | — | — | 29.5% | 25.6% | 0.0% | 25.8% | 19.1% | 80.9% | 134.09 | — | — | — | — | 32.6% | — | 8.0% | 31.2% | 68.8% | 166.77 | — | — | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 25.0% | 74.3% | 0.1% | 99.9% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_2_beta0_5 | 265 | 30 | 2.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 177.39 | — | — | — | 20.8% | 21.0% | 0.0% | 21.6% | 36.7% | 63.3% | 66.40 | — | — | — | — | 39.8% | — | 10.2% | 46.4% | 53.6% | 80.04 | — | — | 0.1% | 0.1% | 4.6% | 17.7% | 77.7% | 0.1% | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_alphaCE_2_beta0_75 | 265 | 30 | 2.00 | 0.75 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 226.72 | — | — | — | 17.0% | 12.1% | 0.9% | 12.1% | 57.9% | 42.1% | 47.59 | — | — | — | — | 55.8% | 11.8% | 24.8% | 4.0% | 96.0% | 175.79 | — | — | 0.2% | 0.2% | 31.7% | 11.6% | 56.5% | 0.2% | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_265_RMP_D | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 95.32 | — | — | — | 16.9% | 23.8% | 0.6% | 10.7% | 47.9% | 52.1% | 54.63 | — | — | — | — | 47.3% | 1.3% | 17.1% | 20.0% | 80.0% | 80.04 | — | — | — | — | 15.3% | 3.9% | 80.8% | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_265_RMP_M | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | MM SN | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 19.02 | — | — | — | 9.1% | 5.0% | 1.9% | 40.9% | 43.1% | 56.9% | 27.56 | — | — | — | — | 3.2% | 2.7% | 22.9% | 10.7% | 89.3% | 58.10 | — | — | — | — | 6.6% | 6.4% | 87.0% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_265_RMP_R | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 139.39 | — | — | — | 33.3% | 15.6% | 0.3% | 7.3% | 43.5% | 56.5% | 351.74 | — | — | — | — | 12.6% | 0.2% | 5.5% | 11.8% | 88.2% | 55.42 | — | — | — | — | 11.2% | 2.5% | 86.3% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_30_RMP_D | 30 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 237.99 | — | — | — | 57.3% | 10.1% | 0.5% | 6.7% | 25.3% | 74.7% | 551.50 | — | — | — | — | 15.6% | 0.4% | 28.9% | 2.7% | 97.3% | 485.66 | — | — | 0.1% | 0.1% | 4.3% | 5.4% | 90.3% | 0.1% | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_30_RMP_M | 30 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | MM SN | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 433.44 | — | — | — | 43.7% | 7.0% | 0.3% | 7.2% | 41.9% | 58.1% | 743.50 | — | — | — | — | 22.1% | 1.5% | 11.9% | 1.5% | 98.5% | 299.51 | — | — | — | — | 1.8% | 3.9% | 94.3% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_30_RMP_R | 30 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 182.85 | — | — | — | 59.3% | 5.9% | 0.1% | 4.0% | 30.7% | 69.3% | 596.32 | — | — | — | — | 12.0% | 0.2% | 18.0% | 0.1% | 99.9% | 351.18 | — | — | — | — | 4.6% | 5.6% | 89.8% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_750_RMP_D | 750 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 33.41 | — | — | — | 10.6% | 18.4% | 0.1% | 8.8% | 62.1% | 37.9% | 15.24 | — | — | — | — | 44.7% | 1.0% | 12.5% | 0.7% | 99.3% | 69.45 | — | — | — | — | 5.8% | 7.5% | 86.7% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_750_RMP_M | 750 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | MM SN | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 0.60 | — | — | — | 1.8% | 5.4% | 2.3% | 74.6% | 15.9% | 84.1% | 3.69 | — | — | — | — | 0.9% | 21.7% | 9.8% | 1.1% | 98.9% | 53.15 | — | — | — | — | 6.3% | 3.2% | 90.5% | — | 100.0% |
| Boesky et al. (2024) | Boesky_sigma_750_RMP_R | 750 | 30 | 0.50 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | fit based on Marchant et … | zeta prescription | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; Nanjing … | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 82.64 | — | — | — | 30.3% | 10.9% | 0.2% | 7.7% | 50.9% | 49.1% | 229.53 | — | — | — | — | 7.1% | 0.4% | 0.5% | 0.2% | 99.8% | 49.37 | — | — | — | — | 5.8% | 2.9% | 91.3% | — | 100.0% |
| Briel et al. (2022) | Briel (2022) | 265 | 265 | N/A (BPASS uses detailed stellar structure, not α-λ formalism) | Hurley 2002 | N/A (BPASS) | BPASS | BPASS | Farmer (2019) with additi… | BPASS | ET04 | N/A (BPASS AM loss h… | BPASS | Eddington … | N/A (BPASS STAR… | BPASS CE treated via detailed … | N/A (BPASS does not … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | BPASS STARS code includes… | Eldridge & Tout (2004… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) log-normal … | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.1, 1… | 0.55 (Sana et al. 20… | Z = 10⁻⁵ to 0.04; 13 metallici… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (BPASS default; … | 265 (BPASS appl… | 6.50 | — | 6.4% | — | 45.3% | — | — | — | 13.9% | 86.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Briel et al. (2022) | Briel (2022) - DELAYED | 265 | 265 | N/A (BPASS uses detailed stellar structure, not α-λ formalism) | Hurley 2002 | N/A (BPASS) | BPASS | BPASS | Farmer (2019) with additi… | BPASS | F12 rapid | N/A (BPASS AM loss h… | BPASS | Eddington … | N/A (BPASS STAR… | BPASS CE treated via detailed … | N/A (BPASS does not … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | BPASS STARS code includes… | Eldridge & Tout (2004… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) log-normal … | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.1, 1… | 0.55 (Sana et al. 20… | Z = 10⁻⁵ to 0.04; 13 metallici… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (BPASS default; … | 265 (BPASS appl… | 48.00 | — | 10.9% | — | 35.4% | — | — | — | 14.6% | 85.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Briel et al. (2022) | Briel (2022) - RAPID | 265 | 265 | N/A (BPASS uses detailed stellar structure, not α-λ formalism) | Hurley 2002 | N/A (BPASS) | BPASS | BPASS | Farmer (2019) with additi… | BPASS | F12 delayed | N/A (BPASS AM loss h… | BPASS | Eddington … | N/A (BPASS STAR… | BPASS CE treated via detailed … | N/A (BPASS does not … | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | BPASS STARS code includes… | Eldridge & Tout (2004… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) log-normal … | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.1, 1… | 0.55 (Sana et al. 20… | Z = 10⁻⁵ to 0.04; 13 metallici… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (BPASS default; … | 265 (BPASS appl… | 57.10 | — | 9.7% | — | 41.3% | — | — | — | 12.8% | 87.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M1 | 0 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 23.40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 59.0% | 41.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M10 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 30.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 7.9% | 92.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M11 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 47.80 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.4% | 95.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M12 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 28.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 8.6% | 91.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M13 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 70.30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 62.4% | 37.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M14 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 93.10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 78.7% | 21.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M15 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 89.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 51.1% | 48.9% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M16 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 101.70 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 74.7% | 25.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M2 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 26.40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 38.6% | 61.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M3 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 19.10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 70.2% | 29.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M4 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 21.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 43.3% | 56.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M5 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 67.30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 89.2% | 10.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M6 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 100.90 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 88.1% | 11.9% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M7 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 59.50 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 90.6% | 9.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M8 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.70 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 2.5 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 88.30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 87.7% | 12.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dorozsmai & Toonen (2022) | DT22-M9 | 315 | 75 | αCE×λ = 0.05 (combined; α not stated separately in paper) | 0.30 | pessimistic | standard | variable (SeBa internal s… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | 1 | isotropic re-emission; γ param… | True | 1 | alpha*lambda = 0.05 | No (pessimistic; SeB… | de Jager et al. (1988); Vink e… | Hut (1981) equilibrium ti… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); 1–10⁶… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ (0, 1] … | 1.0 (all stars assum… | Solar metallicity (Z = 0.02) o… | Not applicable (single-metalli… | 3.0 (SeBa default; F… | 75 (Verbunt, Ig… | 33.40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 6.6% | 93.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Hendriks et al. (2023) | Hendriks23 | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | variable (de Kool 1990 / … | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard CE energy fo… | No (pessimistic; bin… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 0.03; multiple met… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (binary_c defaul… | 30 (low kick fo… | 25.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 40.0% | 60.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-a | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH; 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -1 | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 36.00 | 11.9% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 25.8% | 74.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-b | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH; 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -2 | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 24.00 | 24.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 35.8% | 64.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-c | 265 | 30 | 0.50 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH; 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -1 | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 37.20 | 16.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 35.2% | 64.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-d | 265 | 30 | 2.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH; 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -1 | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 55.60 | 10.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 23.6% | 76.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-e | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH; 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -1 | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 0.5 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 87.20 | 2.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 26.0% | 74.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-f | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH; 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -1 | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 2 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 15.40 | 7.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 23.4% | 76.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-g | 45 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH; 10x thermal rate for stellar accretor) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -1 | non-conservative MT mass lost … | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 16.40 | 6.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 15.9% | 84.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-h | 750 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ | F12 delayed | -1 | specific AM of accretor (Hurle… | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 19.20 | 5.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 31.3% | 68.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Li et al. (2025) | Li25-i | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | $q_{\rm{c}}$ Ge | F12 delayed | -1 | specific AM of accretor (Hurle… | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE (HG… | No (pessimistic; MOB… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); MOBSE… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (MOBSE / Gia… | 0.5 (MOBSE default; … | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (7 metall… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (MOBSE / Giacobb… | 30 (low kick; M… | 96.60 | 4.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | 96.6% | 3.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Olejak et al. (2021) | Olejak21-M380 (fiducial) | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing-style (Dominik et… | Farmer et al. (2019) / Be… | zeta prescription (StarTr… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | For non-degenerate accretors, … | We applied… | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard energy forma… | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) broken po… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0, 1] … | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02 (8 metallic… | Strolger et al. (2004) / Madau… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 61.70 | — | 0.5% | — | 85.6% | — | 3.2% | — | 0.5% | 88.8% | 13.10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 77.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Olejak et al. (2021) | Olejak21-M480 (changedCEcriteria) | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing-style (Dominik et… | Farmer et al. (2019) / Be… | new type of stability bas… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | For non-degenerate accretors, … | We applied… | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard energy forma… | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) broken po… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0, 1] … | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02 (8 metallic… | Strolger et al. (2004) / Madau… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 88.40 | — | 94.0% | — | 4.1% | — | 1.6% | — | 94.0% | 5.7% | 15.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 7.7% | 80.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Olejak et al. (2021) | Olejak21-M481 (changedCEcriteria+switch) | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing-style (Dominik et… | Farmer et al. (2019) / Be… | new type of stability bas… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | For non-degenerate accretors, … | We applied… | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard energy forma… | Switched (M481: CE c… | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) broken po… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0, 1] … | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02 (8 metallic… | Strolger et al. (2004) / Madau… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 17.90 | — | 2.2% | — | 86.6% | — | 7.8% | — | 2.2% | 94.4% | 4.10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 73.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Pellouin et al. (2025) | Pellouin25 | 265 | 20 | 1.00 | -1.00 | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | pisn=-2 (default BSE trea… | qcrit (qcflag=5, Neijssel… | F12 rapid | -2 | xi=0.5, gamma=-2; Bondi-Hoyle … | TRUE (acc2… | 0.5 | Fragos et al. (2019); no exter… | No (pessimistic; cem… | Corrected BSE winds (windflag=… | Hut (1981) / BSE equilibr… | Fryer et al. (2012) rapid… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.5 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 9.5×10⁻⁵ to 0.014; 14 log-… | Springel & Hernquist (2003… | 3.0 (mxns=3.0; COSMI… | 20 (sigmadiv=-2… | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 298.00 | — | — | — | — | — | 96.3% | 3.7% | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-A-Fiducial | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 69.34 | — | — | — | 96.1% | 0.1% | 3.3% | — | 0.5% | 99.5% | 15.01 | — | — | — | — | — | 19.5% | — | 0.3% | 99.7% | 158.35 | — | — | — | 99.8% | 0.2% | 0.0% | — | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-A-Fiducial_Optimistic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | optimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; optimistic CE (HG don… | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-B-RMAX2 | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 63.89 | — | — | — | 99.2% | 0.4% | 0.1% | — | 0.4% | 99.6% | 14.75 | — | — | — | — | 0.0% | 17.2% | — | 0.1% | 99.9% | 163.20 | — | — | — | 99.7% | 0.3% | 0.0% | — | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-B-RMAX2_Optimistic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | optimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; optimistic CE (HG don… | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-C-RMAX3 | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 43.64 | — | — | — | 37.7% | 0.1% | 61.3% | — | 0.9% | 99.1% | 19.82 | — | — | — | — | 0.0% | 71.0% | — | 0.2% | 99.8% | 157.44 | — | — | — | 99.8% | 0.2% | 0.0% | — | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-C-RMAX3_Optimistic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | optimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; optimistic CE (HG don… | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-D-RMAX4 | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 21.80 | — | — | — | 89.0% | 0.1% | 9.7% | — | 1.1% | 98.9% | 10.00 | — | — | — | — | 0.2% | 28.3% | — | 0.1% | 99.9% | 101.59 | — | — | — | 99.7% | 0.3% | 0.0% | — | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-D-RMAX4_Optimistic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | optimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; optimistic CE (HG don… | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-E-RMAX4B | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 65.26 | — | — | — | 96.7% | 0.1% | 2.9% | — | 0.3% | 99.7% | 15.86 | — | — | — | — | 0.0% | 15.7% | — | 0.1% | 99.9% | 160.15 | — | — | — | 99.8% | 0.2% | 0.1% | — | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2023) | R23-E-RMAX4B_Optimistic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | optimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; optimistic CE (HG don… | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-A-Fiducial | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 68.54 | — | — | — | 94.6% | — | 4.3% | — | 1.1% | 98.9% | 13.37 | — | — | — | — | — | 20.2% | — | 1.6% | 98.4% | 111.40 | — | — | — | 99.9% | — | 0.0% | — | 0.1% | 99.9% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-A-Fiducial_Optimistic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | optimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; optimistic CE (HG don… | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-B-RMAX | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 63.42 | — | — | — | 95.0% | — | 4.1% | — | 0.8% | 99.2% | 11.96 | — | — | — | — | — | 18.1% | — | 1.5% | 98.5% | 113.34 | — | — | — | 99.8% | — | 0.1% | — | 0.1% | 99.9% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-B-RMAX_Optimistic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | optimistic | standard | Nanjing (Dominik et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; optimistic CE (HG don… | Yes (optimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-C-Conv_ML1.5 | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 14.60 | — | — | — | 95.5% | — | 0.3% | — | 4.2% | 95.8% | 12.34 | — | — | — | — | — | 0.5% | — | 2.4% | 97.6% | 53.83 | — | — | — | 99.7% | — | 0.1% | — | 0.2% | 99.8% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-D-Conv_ML1.5_RMAX | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 3.09 | — | — | — | 79.0% | 15.2% | 0.3% | — | 5.5% | 94.5% | 12.53 | — | — | — | — | 1.0% | 0.1% | — | 1.3% | 98.7% | 2.48 | — | — | — | 98.8% | 1.2% | — | — | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-E-Conv_ML1.82_MLTpp | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 103.49 | — | — | — | 96.0% | 0.3% | 3.6% | — | 0.0% | 100.0% | 12.64 | — | — | — | — | 0.8% | 6.6% | — | — | 100.0% | 17.19 | — | — | — | 99.5% | 0.5% | — | — | — | 100.0% |
| Romagnolo et al. (2025) | R25-E-Conv_ML1.82_MLTpp_RMAX | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | Belczynski et al. (2008) … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor (Belcz… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard Webbink 1984… | No (pessimistic; HG … | Vink et al. (2000a,b, 2001) ho… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa et al. (1993) / Kroupa … | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); a: 2–… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (StarTrack d… | 0.5 (StarTrack defau… | Z = 0.0002 to 0.02; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (StarTrack defau… | 265 (StarTrack … | 38.88 | — | — | — | 94.7% | 1.4% | 3.8% | — | 0.1% | 99.9% | 12.42 | — | — | — | — | 1.8% | 2.5% | — | — | 100.0% | 15.80 | — | — | — | 99.7% | 0.3% | — | — | — | 100.0% |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-ECSN:Full-SN:delayed | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 69.63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 44.6% | 55.4% | 5.81 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 49.6% | 50.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-ESCN:Full-SN:N20 | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | N20 (Sukhbold et al. 2016) | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 203.49 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 20.4% | 79.6% | 69.35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.3% | 95.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-ESCN:Full-SN:rapid | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 115.24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 29.2% | 70.8% | 10.71 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 29.1% | 70.9% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-SN:N20 | 265 | 20 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | N20 (Sukhbold et al. 2016) | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 202.51 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 19.6% | 80.4% | 77.24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 3.0% | 97.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-SN:delayed | 265 | 20 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 70.40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 44.4% | 55.6% | 5.65 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 54.2% | 45.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-SN:rapid | 265 | 20 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 114.18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 28.9% | 71.1% | 10.14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 28.2% | 71.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-noBH-kick-SN:delayed | 0 | 20 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 193.67 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 13.6% | 86.4% | 32.67 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 7.6% | 92.4% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-noBHkick-SN:N20 | 0 | 20 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | N20 (Sukhbold et al. 2016) | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 202.51 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 19.6% | 80.4% | 77.24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 3.0% | 97.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Román-Garza et al. (2022) | RG21-noBHkick-SN:rapid | 0 | 20 | 1.00 | thermal | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; pessimistic CE (HG do… | No (pessimistic) | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: N20 eng… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2×10⁻² (multiple m… | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (POSYDON default… | 20 (low kick fo… | 160.79 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 19.5% | 80.5% | 16.54 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 11.4% | 88.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Sgalletta et al. (2025) | Sgalletta_alpha_0_5 | 265 | 7 | 0.50 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | qcrit prescription (Neijs… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE; SE… | No (pessimistic; SEV… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 1.7×10⁻² (PARSEC… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (SEVN / Giacobbo… | Scaled by eject… | 255.60 | — | — | — | 78.2% | 1.4% | 12.5% | — | 7.8% | 92.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Sgalletta et al. (2025) | Sgalletta_alpha_1 | 265 | 7 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | qcrit prescription (Neijs… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE; SE… | No (pessimistic; SEV… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 1.7×10⁻² (PARSEC… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (SEVN / Giacobbo… | Scaled by eject… | 296.40 | — | — | — | 77.6% | 0.5% | 15.2% | — | 6.7% | 93.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Sgalletta et al. (2025) | Sgalletta_alpha_3 | 265 | 7 | 3.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | qcrit prescription (Neijs… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE; SE… | No (pessimistic; SEV… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 1.7×10⁻² (PARSEC… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (SEVN / Giacobbo… | Scaled by eject… | 203.30 | — | — | — | 78.7% | 0.6% | 10.8% | — | 9.8% | 90.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Sgalletta et al. (2025) | Sgalletta_alpha_5 | 265 | 7 | 5.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | qcrit prescription (Neijs… | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | specific AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies; pessimistic CE; SE… | No (pessimistic; SEV… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 4×10⁻⁴ to 1.7×10⁻² (PARSEC… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (SEVN / Giacobbo… | Scaled by eject… | 144.00 | — | — | — | 76.4% | — | 9.7% | — | 13.9% | 86.1% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shao & Li (2021) | ShaoLi_delayed | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription (BSE / … | F12 delayed | specific AM of accre… | isotropic re-emission (Soberma… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard CE energy fo… | No (pessimistic; BSE… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: Fryer e… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); BSE d… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (BSE / Hurle… | 0.5 (BSE default) | Z = 0.0001 to 0.03; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (BSE default) | 265 (BSE applie… | 47.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 78.0% | 22.0% | 10.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 41.0% | 59.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shao & Li (2021) | ShaoLi_rapid | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription (BSE / … | F12 rapid | specific AM of accre… | isotropic re-emission (Soberma… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard CE energy fo… | No (pessimistic; BSE… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: Fryer e… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); BSE d… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (BSE / Hurle… | 0.5 (BSE default) | Z = 0.0001 to 0.03; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (BSE default) | 265 (BSE applie… | 42.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 70.0% | 30.0% | 17.40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 28.0% | 72.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shao & Li (2021) | ShaoLi_stochastic | 265 | 265 | 1.00 | 0.50 | pessimistic | standard | variable (Claeys et al. 2… | Farmer et al. (2019) | zeta prescription (BSE / … | MM SN (stochastic, Mandel & Mü… | specific AM of accre… | isotropic re-emission (Soberma… | TRUE | 1 | αCE=1.0; standard CE energy fo… | No (pessimistic; BSE… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Hurley et al. (2002) BSE … | Varies per model: Fryer e… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Flat-in-log (Öpik 1924); BSE d… | Flat in q = M2/M1 (BSE / Hurle… | 0.5 (BSE default) | Z = 0.0001 to 0.03; multiple m… | Madau & Dickinson (2014) S… | 2.5 (BSE default) | 265 (BSE applie… | 76.10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 30.0% | 70.0% | 71.70 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 14.0% | 86.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Xing et al. (2024) | Xing24_alpha_2 | 265 | 30 | 2.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | POSYDON detailed MT stabi… | delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; POS… | POSYDON v2: MESA-computed stel… | POSYDON v2 MESA grids inc… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2 Z☉; POSYDON v2 c… | IllustrisTNG cosmological simu… | 2.5 (POSYDON v2 defa… | 30 (low-kick ch… | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 162.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 14.0% | 86.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Xing et al. (2024) | Xing24_fiducial | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | POSYDON detailed MT stabi… | delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; POS… | POSYDON v2: MESA-computed stel… | POSYDON v2 MESA grids inc… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2 Z☉; POSYDON v2 c… | IllustrisTNG cosmological simu… | 2.5 (POSYDON v2 defa… | 30 (low-kick ch… | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 72.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 30.0% | 70.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Xing et al. (2024) | Xing24_sigma_150 | 150 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | POSYDON detailed MT stabi… | delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; POS… | POSYDON v2: MESA-computed stel… | POSYDON v2 MESA grids inc… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2 Z☉; POSYDON v2 c… | IllustrisTNG cosmological simu… | 2.5 (POSYDON v2 defa… | 30 (low-kick ch… | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 193.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 25.0% | 75.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Xing et al. (2024) | Xing24_sigma_61_6 | 62 | 30 | 1.00 | non-conservative (Eddington-limited onto BH) | pessimistic | standard | Nanjing | Farmer et al. (2019) | POSYDON detailed MT stabi… | delayed | specific AM of accre… | Hurley (2002) AM of accretor | TRUE | 1 | αCE varies per model; pessimis… | No (pessimistic; POS… | POSYDON v2: MESA-computed stel… | POSYDON v2 MESA grids inc… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Sana et al. (2012) period dist… | Uniform in q = M2/M1 (Sana et … | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Z = 10⁻⁴ to 2 Z☉; POSYDON v2 c… | IllustrisTNG cosmological simu… | 2.5 (POSYDON v2 defa… | 30 (low-kick ch… | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 408.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 3.0% | 97.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| van Son et al. (2022) | van Son (2022) | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | during stable MT onto a stellar companion, accretion limited to $10\times$ the thermal rate of the accretor | pessimistic | standard | ``Nanjing'' prescription … | Farmer et al.~(2019); PPI… | zeta prescription | F12 delayed | non-conservative MT … | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | αCE=1.0; σ=265 inferred from H… | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same Maxwel… | 73.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 37.0% | 63.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| van Son et al. (2023) | van Son (2023) | 265 | 30 | 1.00 | during stable MT onto a stellar companion, accretion limited to $10\times$ the thermal rate of the accretor | pessimistic | standard | ``Nanjing'' prescription … | Farmer et al.~(2019); PPI… | zeta prescription: $\zeta… | F12 delayed | non-conservative MT … | non-conservative MT mass lost … | True | 1 | αCE=1.0; ζ stability (ζ_ad=2 M… | No (pessimistic; Dom… | Vink et al. (2000a,b) hot star… | Included via COMPAS/BSE f… | Fryer et al. (2012) delay… | Kroupa (2001) broken power-law… | Öpik (1924) flat-in-log; 0.01–… | Uniform in q = M2/M1; q ∈ [0.0… | 0.7 (Sana et al. 201… | Flat-in-log; 10⁻⁴ ≤ Z ≤ 0.03; … | IllustrisTNG100 cosmological s… | 2.5 (COMPAS default) | 30 (same as σ_s… | 58.90 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 29.0% | 71.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Interactive versions of Figures 3–5 and 9–13 from Broekgaarden et al. (2026). Each figure is fully interactive: hover over any bar or point to see the paper name and all formation-channel fractions, click legend entries to show/hide channels, and zoom or pan with the Plotly toolbar. Figures 3–5 offer a Simple view (CE vs. no-CE) and a Detailed view (individual channels); use the toggle to switch.
Each point is one population-synthesis model. The three horizontal lanes correspond to BBH (top), BHNS (middle), and BNS (bottom). The x-axis shows the fraction of mergers forming via the selected pathway; the mirrored top axis shows the complementary fraction. Hover over any point to see the paper, model name, merger rate, and all three simple formation-channel fractions (without CE, with CE, not specified). Toggle between the two x-axis orientations below.
Formation-channel breakdown for all compiled BBH population-synthesis models, sorted by the fraction forming without a common-envelope (CE) phase (ascending). Simple view shows the broad CE / no-CE / unspecified split. Detailed view resolves individual sub-channels (classic SMT, CHE, classic CE, SCCE, DCCE, …) and is restricted to models that report detailed channel fractions. The right panel shows the total local intrinsic merger rate; the grey band marks the GWTC-5 observed range.
Same as Figure 3 for BH–NS mergers.
Same as Figure 3 for NS–NS mergers.
Fraction of BBH mergers forming without a CE phase as a function of the total local intrinsic BBH merger rate Rm for all compiled population-synthesis simulations. Each point represents one model; colors distinguish studies. Lines connect models within the same study that vary a single parameter, illustrating the parameter sensitivity within each framework.
Same as Figure 9 for BH–NS mergers.
Dependence of the fraction of BBH mergers forming without a CE phase on commonly varied binary-evolution parameters (mass-transfer stability criterion qc, CE efficiency αCE, mass-transfer efficiency β, natal kick dispersion σ, and remnant-mass prescription). Each panel shows controlled single-parameter variations within a given study. Points are individual models; horizontal lines span the range of variation within each parameter family.
Same as Figure 12 for BH–NS mergers.
Formation-channel fraction as a function of metallicity log₁₀(Z) for all three DCO types (BBH, BHNS, BNS) and all four population-synthesis studies. Columns 1–3 show the fraction forming with CE; columns 4–6 show the fraction forming without CE. Hover over any line to highlight it and read its model label (e.g. "Iorio | model F | α=1.0" or "Broekgaarden | model A"). All other lines fade so the selected one stands out.