pith. sign in

arxiv: 2508.01135 · v2 · pith:GW27GUCJnew · submitted 2025-08-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.HE

GW231123 Formation from Population III Stars: Isolated Binary Evolution

Ataru Tanikawa , Shuai Liu , WeiWei Wu , Michiko S. Fujii , Long Wang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 01:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE
keywords Population III starsblack hole mergersgravitational wavesbinary population synthesisconvective overshootingnuclear reaction ratesGW231123
0
0 comments X

The pith

Isolated Population III binaries can produce GW231123-like events under three specific stellar evolution conditions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper investigates the origin of GW231123, the most massive black hole merger detected, with both black holes exceeding 100 solar masses. Using binary population synthesis, the authors demonstrate that isolated Population III binaries can generate such events at rates consistent with observations when three conditions hold: inefficient convective overshooting in Pop III stars, a 12C(α, γ)16O rate two sigma below standard, and initial orbital parameters identical to those of Population I/II binaries. This result implies that the detection increasingly limits the viable models for how the first stars evolve. Readers should care as it connects a real gravitational wave signal to the physics of the earliest stars in the universe.

Core claim

Isolated Pop III binaries can produce GW231123-like events at a rate sufficient to explain the discovery of GW231123, provided that three conditions are met: (i) Pop III stars evolve with inefficient convective overshooting, (ii) the 12C(α, γ)16O rate is 2σ lower than the standard value, and (iii) Pop III binary stars share the same orbital parameters as Pop I/II binary stars at the initial time. In contrast, GW190521 can be formed from isolated Pop III binaries even with the standard 12C(α, γ)16O rate.

What carries the argument

Binary population synthesis calculations that vary convective overshooting efficiency and the 12C(α, γ)16O nuclear reaction rate for Population III stars to compute merger rates and masses.

If this is right

  • The formation rate of GW231123-like mergers from isolated Pop III binaries reaches observed levels under the three conditions.
  • GW231123 imposes tighter limits on single-star evolution parameters than earlier events such as GW190521.
  • GW190521 forms from Pop III binaries even when the nuclear reaction rate takes its standard value.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If Pop III binaries actually begin with different orbital distributions, the contribution of isolated evolution to the heaviest mergers could fall below detectable levels.
  • Gravitational-wave catalogs may eventually map the initial conditions of the first binaries through the statistics of their remnant masses.

Load-bearing premise

Population III binary stars share the same initial orbital parameters as Population I/II binary stars.

What would settle it

A determination that the initial orbital period and mass ratio distributions of Pop III binaries differ substantially from those of Pop I/II binaries would change the predicted rates enough to rule out this channel for GW231123.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.01135 by Ataru Tanikawa, Long Wang, Michiko S. Fujii, Shuai Liu, WeiWei Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Relation between ZAMS and remnant masses for parameter sets we adopt. The curves of the M2σ and M3σ sets overlap. GW231123 in the L model. Thus, the number of pa￾rameter sets with the L model is only two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Normalized distribution of the merger rate den￾sity of GW231123-like events as functions of effective inspiral spin and mass ratio in the M2σ set. The shaded region indi￾cates 90 % credible intervals of effective inspiral spins. In the m2/m1-χeff maps, the merger rate density becomes larger as the color shifts from orange to blue. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

GW231123 is a merger of two black holes (BHs) with estimated masses exceeding $100\;{\rm M}_{\odot}$, making them the most massive BHs discovered to date via gravitational wave (GW) observations. We investigate whether GW231123-like events can originate from isolated Population (Pop) III binary stars using binary population synthesis calculations. Our findings indicate that isolated Pop III binaries can produce GW231123-like events at a rate sufficient to explain the discovery of GW231123, provided that three conditions are met: (i) Pop III stars evolve with inefficient convective overshooting, (ii) the $^{12}\text{C}(\alpha, \gamma)^{16}\text{O}$ rate is $2\sigma$ lower than the standard value, and (iii) Pop III binary stars share the same orbital parameters as Pop I/II binary stars at the initial time. In contrast, GW190521 -- the most massive BH merger in the Gravitational Wave Transient Catalog 3 -- can be formed from isolated Pop III binaries even with the standard $^{12}\text{C}(\alpha, \gamma)^{16}\text{O}$ rate. We demonstrate that the discovery of GW231123 is increasingly constraining the parameter ranges of single star evolution models, under the assumption that these GW events originate from isolated binary evolution.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses binary population synthesis to investigate whether isolated Population III binary stars can produce the high-mass black hole merger GW231123. The central claim is that such events can occur at a rate sufficient to explain the observation provided three conditions hold: inefficient convective overshooting in Pop III stars, a 12C(α,γ)16O reaction rate 2σ below the standard value, and initial orbital parameters for Pop III binaries identical to those of Pop I/II binaries. The paper contrasts this with GW190521, which forms under standard nuclear rates, and argues that the GW231123 discovery constrains single-star evolution models under the isolated binary channel.

Significance. If the result holds, the work would establish a viable isolated Pop III channel for the most massive observed GW events and demonstrate how such detections can tighten constraints on convective overshooting and nuclear rates. The explicit mapping of required parameter adjustments to match a specific event provides a concrete example of the constraining power of GW observations on stellar models.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Results section] Abstract and Results section: The central claim that isolated Pop III binaries produce GW231123-like events at a sufficient rate rests on condition (iii), that Pop III binaries share the same initial orbital-parameter distribution as Pop I/II binaries. This assumption is not derived from Pop III formation physics and is load-bearing, because binary merger rates are exponentially sensitive to the initial period and eccentricity distributions; a modest shift toward wider orbits would sharply reduce the fraction of systems undergoing the required mass-transfer or common-envelope channels.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The abstract states that the predicted rate is 'sufficient to explain the discovery' under the three conditions but reports neither the numerical rate value, its uncertainty, nor tests of alternative assumptions for the initial orbital distribution, leaving the robustness of the conclusion difficult to assess from the summary alone.
minor comments (1)
  1. Consider adding a dedicated table or figure panel that quantifies the predicted merger rate (with error bars) under each of the three conditions separately and in combination, to improve clarity of the sensitivity analysis.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which have helped us clarify the assumptions and quantitative aspects of our study on GW231123 formation from isolated Population III binaries. We address each major comment below and indicate the corresponding revisions to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Results section] Abstract and Results section: The central claim that isolated Pop III binaries produce GW231123-like events at a sufficient rate rests on condition (iii), that Pop III binaries share the same initial orbital-parameter distribution as Pop I/II binaries. This assumption is not derived from Pop III formation physics and is load-bearing, because binary merger rates are exponentially sensitive to the initial period and eccentricity distributions; a modest shift toward wider orbits would sharply reduce the fraction of systems undergoing the required mass-transfer or common-envelope channels.

    Authors: We agree that the adoption of the same initial orbital-parameter distribution as for Pop I/II binaries is a key assumption, as current Pop III formation simulations do not yet yield robust, observationally calibrated predictions for binary periods and eccentricities. This choice is made explicitly to test the viability of the isolated channel under a conservative baseline drawn from later-generation binaries. To address the sensitivity concern, we have added a dedicated paragraph in the Results section quantifying how shifts toward wider initial periods reduce the GW231123-like merger fraction, while demonstrating that a non-negligible rate remains possible within the parameter space allowed by the other two conditions (inefficient overshooting and reduced 12C(α,γ)16O rate). We believe this addition improves transparency without changing the central conclusion that the isolated Pop III channel remains viable under the stated assumptions. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The abstract states that the predicted rate is 'sufficient to explain the discovery' under the three conditions but reports neither the numerical rate value, its uncertainty, nor tests of alternative assumptions for the initial orbital distribution, leaving the robustness of the conclusion difficult to assess from the summary alone.

    Authors: We accept that the abstract would benefit from greater quantitative detail. We have revised the abstract to include the estimated merger rate (with uncertainty range) under the three conditions and a brief statement noting the sensitivity to the initial orbital distribution. These additions allow readers to evaluate the claim more directly from the summary. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is conditional on explicit inputs with independent simulation outputs.

full rationale

The paper conducts binary population synthesis calculations whose outputs (formation rates) depend on chosen inputs for convective overshooting efficiency, the 12C(α,γ)16O rate, and initial orbital-parameter distributions. The central claim is explicitly conditional: rates are sufficient only if those three conditions hold. No equation or result is shown to equal its own input by construction, no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no load-bearing premise reduces to a self-citation chain. The orbital-parameter assumption is presented as a premise rather than derived internally, and the stellar-evolution physics remains independent of the target GW event. The chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model depends on three adjusted inputs whose values are selected to reproduce the observed event rather than derived from first principles or independent data.

free parameters (3)
  • convective overshooting efficiency
    Set to inefficient value to allow higher core masses; value chosen to match GW231123 masses.
  • 12C(alpha,gamma)16O reaction rate
    Reduced by 2 sigma from standard; required to produce sufficient massive black holes.
  • initial orbital parameter distribution
    Assumed identical to Pop I/II binaries; directly affects merger rate.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions of binary population synthesis (common-envelope efficiency, wind mass loss, supernova kicks) remain valid for Population III stars.
    Invoked throughout the simulation setup in the methods.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5778 in / 1559 out tokens · 33146 ms · 2026-05-19T01:59:36.289937+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 8 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. The First Model-Independent Upper Bound on Micro-lensing Signature of the Highest Mass Binary Black Hole Event GW231123

    gr-qc 2025-12 conditional novelty 7.0

    No definitive lensing is detected in GW231123, though a potential microlensing feature with modulation amplitude up to 0.8 at 95% confidence is noted, limited by large waveform systematics in short signals.

  2. Investigating the formation channel of GW231123: Population III stars or hierarchical mergers?

    astro-ph.GA 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    GW231123 most likely formed through hierarchical mergers of black holes in metal-poor globular clusters, with isolated binary channels failing to match the observed merger redshift and masses.

  3. Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape for the Laser Interferometer Lunar Antenna (LILA): Signal-to-Noise Calculations & Science Cases

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    LILA can detect IMBH binaries at redshifts 20-30, IMRIs, and provide months-to-years early warnings with high-SNR events for gravity tests.

  4. Investigating the formation channel of GW231123: Population III stars or hierarchical mergers?

    astro-ph.GA 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Coupled cosmological and cluster simulations show isolated binary evolution cannot produce GW231123-like mergers at the observed redshift, while hierarchical mergers in globular clusters can, yielding a local rate of ...

  5. Constraints on the $^{12}$C$(\alpha, \gamma)^{16}$O and $^{16}$O+$^{16}$O Reaction Rates from Binary Black Holes Detected via Gravitational Wave Signals

    astro-ph.SR 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Stellar models show that the 12C(alpha,gamma)16O rate uncertainty moves the black hole mass gap, constraining its S300 to 137.6-263.4 keV barn when matched to the observed gap from gravitational waves.

  6. Measuring Eccentricity and Addressing Waveform Systematics in GW231123

    gr-qc 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0

    Reanalysis of GW231123 shows no significant eccentricity, with parameter estimate differences explained by waveform model disagreements at strong spin precession.

  7. GW231123: Overlapping Gravitational Wave Signals?

    gr-qc 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0

    GW231123 data favors an overlapping two-signal model over a single merger with Bayes factors of 100-10000, mitigating waveform-dependent discrepancies and suggesting possible gravitational lensing.

  8. The impact of waveform systematics and Gaussian noise on the interpretation of GW231123

    gr-qc 2026-01 accept novelty 4.0

    The high mass and high spin magnitudes inferred for GW231123 using NRSur7dq4 are robust to waveform systematics and Gaussian noise.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · cited by 7 Pith papers · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    D., Abraham , S., et al

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abraham, S., et al. 2020, ApJL, 900, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aba493

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aba493 2020

  2. [2]

    2023, Phys

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Acernese, F., et al. 2023a, Physical Review X, 13, 041039, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.13.041039 6

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.041039

  3. [3]

    2023, Phys

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Acernese, F., et al. 2023b, Physical Review X, 13, 011048, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.13.011048

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.011048

  4. [4]

    L., & Norman, M

    Abel, T., Bryan, G. L., & Norman, M. L. 2002, Science, 295, 93, doi: 10.1126/science.295.5552.93

    work page doi:10.1126/science.295.5552.93 2002

  5. [5]

    Living Reviews in Relativity , keywords =

    Amaro-Seoane, P., Andrews, J., Arca Sedda, M., et al. 2023, Living Reviews in Relativity, 26, 2, doi: 10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y 2023

  6. [6]

    2020, ApJL, 905, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abcbf1

    Belczynski, K. 2020, ApJL, 905, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abcbf1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abcbf1 2020

  7. [7]

    2004, ApJL, 608, L45, doi: 10.1086/422172

    Belczynski, K., Bulik, T., & Rudak, B. 2004, ApJL, 608, L45, doi: 10.1086/422172

    work page doi:10.1086/422172 2004

  8. [8]

    & Charlot, S

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x 2012

  9. [9]

    Bromm, V., & Larson, R. B. 2004, ARA&A, 42, 79, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134034

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134034 2004

  10. [10]

    , keywords =

    Chon, S., Omukai, K., & Schneider, R. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 4175, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2497

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2497 2021

  11. [11]

    C., Glover, S

    Clark, P. C., Glover, S. C. O., Klessen, R. S., & Bromm, V. 2011, ApJ, 727, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/727/2/110

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/727/2/110 2011

  12. [12]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 501, 4514, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3916 Dall’Amico, M., Mapelli, M., Di Carlo, U

    Costa, G., Bressan, A., Mapelli, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 4514, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3916

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3916 2021

  13. [13]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 2891, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2443 Di Carlo, U

    Costa, G., Mapelli, M., Iorio, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 2891, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2443 Di Carlo, U. N., Mapelli, M., Pasquato, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 5132, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2390

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2443 2023

  14. [14]

    2020, ApJL, 902, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbadd

    Justham, S. 2020, ApJL, 902, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbadd

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abbadd 2020

  15. [15]

    H., Hirschi, R., et al

    Farrell, E., Groh, J. H., Hirschi, R., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 502, L40, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa196

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa196 2021

  16. [16]

    ApJ , author =

    Fryer, C. L., Belczynski, K., Wiktorowicz, G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 91, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/749/1/91

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/749/1/91 2012

  17. [17]

    & Charlot, S

    Greif, T. H., Bromm, V., Clark, P. C., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 399, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21212.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21212.x 2012

  18. [18]

    K., Ellis, R

    Harikane, Y., Inoue, A. K., Ellis, R. S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9b2c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9b2c 2025

  19. [19]

    Hartwig, T., Glover, S. C. O., Klessen, R. S., Latif, M. A., & Volonteri, M. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1233, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1368

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1368 2015

  20. [20]

    2017, MNRAS, 470, 898, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1220

    Hirano, S., & Bromm, V. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 898, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1220

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1220 2017

  21. [21]

    Yorke, H. W. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 568, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv044

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv044 2015

  22. [22]

    2014, ApJ, 781, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/60

    Hirano, S., Hosokawa, T., Yoshida, N., et al. 2014, ApJ, 781, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/60

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/781/2/60 2014

  23. [23]

    Hosokawa, T., Omukai, K., Yoshida, N., & Yorke, H. W. 2011, Science, 334, 1250, doi: 10.1126/science.1207433

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1207433 2011

  24. [24]

    Lacey and Carlton M

    Hurley, J. R., Pols, O. R., & Tout, C. A. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 543, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03426.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03426.x 2000

  25. [25]

    , keywords =

    Hurley, J. R., Tout, C. A., & Pols, O. R. 2002, MNRAS, 329, 897, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05038.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05038.x 2002

  26. [26]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 2786, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1280

    Kawashimo, H., Sawada, R., Suwa, Y., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 2786, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1280

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1280 2024

  27. [27]

    2014, MNRAS, 442, 2963, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1022

    Kinugawa, T., Inayoshi, K., Hotokezaka, K., Nakauchi, D., & Nakamura, T. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 2963, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1022

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1022 2014

  28. [28]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 501, L49, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa191

    Kinugawa, T., Nakamura, T., & Nakano, H. 2021, MNRAS, 501, L49, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa191

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa191 2021

  29. [29]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x 2001

  30. [30]

    , keywords =

    Liu, B., & Bromm, V. 2020a, MNRAS, 495, 2475, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1362

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1362

  31. [31]

    2020, ApJL, 903, L40, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abc552

    Liu, B., & Bromm, V. 2020b, ApJL, 903, L40, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abc552

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abc552 2041

  32. [32]

    Liu, S., Wang, L., Hu, Y.-M., Tanikawa, A., & Trani, A. A. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 2262, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1946

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1946 2024

  33. [33]

    2016, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 33, 035010, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/33/3/035010

    Luo, J., Chen, L.-S., Duan, H.-Z., et al. 2016, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 33, 035010, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/33/3/035010

    work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/33/3/035010 2016

  34. [34]

    N., & Nakamura, T

    Machida, M. N., & Nakamura, T. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 1405, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2633

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2633 2015

  35. [35]

    2017, ApJ, 840, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6af9

    Madau, P., & Fragos, T. 2017, ApJ, 840, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6af9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6af9 2017

  36. [36]

    2024, A&A, 690, A106, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450667

    Mestichelli, B., Mapelli, M., Torniamenti, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A106, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450667

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450667 2024

  37. [37]

    1998, ApJ, 508, 141, doi: 10.1086/306395

    Omukai, K., & Nishi, R. 1998, ApJ, 508, 141, doi: 10.1086/306395

    work page doi:10.1086/306395 1998

  38. [38]

    D., van Son, L

    Renzo, M., Hendriks, D. D., van Son, L. A. C., & Farmer, R. 2022, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 6, 25, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ac503e

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ac503e 2022

  39. [39]

    P., Naab, T., Spurzem, R., et al

    Rizzuto, F. P., Naab, T., Spurzem, R., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 5257, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3634

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3634 2021

  40. [40]

    L., Zevin, M., Amaro-Seoane, P., et al

    Rodriguez, C. L., Zevin, M., Amaro-Seoane, P., et al. 2019, PhRvD, 100, 043027, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.043027

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.043027 2019

  41. [41]

    2020, International Journal of Modern Physics A, 35, 2050075, doi: 10.1142/S0217751X2050075X

    Ruan, W.-H., Guo, Z.-K., Cai, R.-G., & Zhang, Y.-Z. 2020, International Journal of Modern Physics A, 35, 2050075, doi: 10.1142/S0217751X2050075X

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x2050075x 2020

  42. [42]

    E., de Koter, A., et al

    Sana, H., de Mink, S. E., de Koter, A., et al. 2012, Science, 337, 444, doi: 10.1126/science.1223344

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1223344 2012

  43. [43]

    2023, MNRAS, 524, 307, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1860

    Santoliquido, F., Mapelli, M., Iorio, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 307, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1860

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1860 2023

  44. [44]

    Skinner, D., & Wise, J. H. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4386, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa139

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa139 2020

  45. [45]

    , keywords =

    Stacy, A., Greif, T. H., & Bromm, V. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 45, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16113.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16113.x 2010

  46. [46]

    2019, ApJ, 882, 121, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3981 7

    Stevenson, S., Sampson, M., Powell, J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 121, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3981 7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3981 2019

  47. [47]

    , keywords =

    Omukai, K. 2020, ApJL, 892, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab7d37

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab7d37 2020

  48. [48]

    2013, ApJ, 773, 185, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/185

    Susa, H. 2013, ApJ, 773, 185, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/185

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/773/2/185 2013

  49. [49]

    2019, ApJ, 877, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b6f

    Susa, H. 2019, ApJ, 877, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b6f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b6f 2019

  50. [50]

    2014, ApJ, 792, 32, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/32

    Susa, H., Hasegawa, K., & Tominaga, N. 2014, ApJ, 792, 32, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/32

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/792/1/32 2014

  51. [51]

    2020 b , , 898, 25, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c

    Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., & Kocsis, B. 2020, ApJ, 898, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c 2020

  52. [52]

    2018, ApJ, 863, 153, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad2d2

    Takahashi, K. 2018, ApJ, 863, 153, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad2d2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad2d2 2018

  53. [53]

    2019, ApJ, 871, 153, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf8a8

    Yoshida, T. 2019, ApJ, 871, 153, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf8a8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf8a8 2019

  54. [54]

    2018, ApJ, 857, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab95f

    Takahashi, K., Yoshida, T., & Umeda, H. 2018, ApJ, 857, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab95f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab95f 2018

  55. [55]

    2016, MNRAS, 456, 1320, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2649

    Yamada, S. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 1320, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2649

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2649 2016

  56. [56]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 505, 2170, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1421

    Umeda, H. 2021a, MNRAS, 505, 2170, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1421

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1421

  57. [57]

    , keywords =

    Kinugawa, T. 2021b, ApJ, 910, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe40d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe40d

  58. [58]

    2020, MNRAS, 495, 4170, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1417

    Umeda, H. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 4170, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1417

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1417 2020

  59. [59]

    GW231123: a Binary Black Hole Merger with Total Mass 190-265 $M_{\odot}$

    Tanikawa, A., Yoshida, T., Kinugawa, T., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 83, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4247 The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, & the KAGRA Collaboration. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08219. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.08219

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac4247 2022

  60. [60]

    Vink, J. S. 2022, ARA&A, 60, 203, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-094949

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-094949 2022

  61. [61]

    S., Higgins, E

    Vink, J. S., Higgins, E. R., Sander, A. A. C., & Sabhahit, G. N. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 146, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab842

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab842 2021

  62. [62]

    I., DeSouza, A

    Vorobyov, E. I., DeSouza, A. L., & Basu, S. 2013, ApJ, 768, 131, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/768/2/131

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/768/2/131 2013

  63. [63]

    2022, MNRAS, 515, 5106, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2043

    Wang, L., Tanikawa, A., & Fujii, M. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 5106, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2043

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2043 2022

  64. [64]

    E., & Heger, A

    Woosley, S. E., & Heger, A. 2021, ApJL, 912, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abf2c4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abf2c4 2021

  65. [65]

    2025, ApJ, 986, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add1df

    Wu, W., Wang, L., Liu, S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add1df

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/add1df 2025

  66. [66]

    2008, Science, 321, 669, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1160259

    Yoshida, N., Omukai, K., & Hernquist, L. 2008, Science, 321, 669, doi: 10.1126/science.1160259

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1160259 2008

  67. [67]

    2019, ApJ, 881, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2b9d

    Yoshida, T., Takiwaki, T., Kotake, K., et al. 2019, ApJ, 881, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2b9d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab2b9d 2019