pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.30303 · v1 · pith:OH6AFDDOnew · submitted 2026-06-29 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.HE

The role of mass transfer efficiency in stability criteria: Implementation in SEVN and a test on blue stragglers and binary compact objects

M. Echeveste , G. J. Escobar , G. Iorio , E. Pancino , M. Mapelli , D. Alvarez Garay , A. Avdeeva , E. Leitinger
show 7 more authors
S. Nedhath S. Rani E. Reggiani N. Sanna S. Saracino L. Steinbauer A. Turchi
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 03:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE
keywords blue stragglersmass transfer stabilityRoche-lobe overflowbinary evolutionpopulation synthesiscompact objectsneutron star binaries
0
0 comments X

The pith

A new stability criterion for Roche-lobe overflow that includes non-conservative mass and angular momentum loss permits stable transfer at higher donor-to-accretor mass ratios.

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

The paper derives a general expression for the change in Roche-lobe radius during mass loss when both mass and angular momentum can leave the system. From this expression it builds a stability criterion that differs from the standard one only in the Roche-lobe response term. When this criterion is coded into the SEVN population-synthesis code, the simulations produce stable mass transfer for binaries whose mass ratios would have been unstable under the old rule. The change raises the total number of blue stragglers and shifts their formation toward wider orbits. The same change also increases the predicted numbers of neutron-star binaries formed through stable channels, including some gravitational-wave progenitors.

Core claim

We derive an expression for the response of the Roche-lobe radius to mass loss in the general case where the mass and angular momentum of the system are not conserved. On the basis of this formulation, we construct a new mass transfer stability criterion that modifies the standard approach only through the Roche-lobe response term. Population synthesis simulations with SEVN show that the new criterion allows stable mass transfer in binaries with higher donor-to-accretor mass ratios, leading to an overall increase in the predicted number of blue stragglers and promoting their formation in wider orbits. For binary compact objects the impact varies across system types, with the strongest effect

What carries the argument

The modified Roche-lobe response term that accounts for simultaneous mass and angular-momentum loss in the mass-transfer stability criterion.

If this is right

  • Stable mass transfer occurs at higher donor-to-accretor mass ratios than before.
  • The total number of blue stragglers increases and their typical formation orbits become wider.
  • Differences between predicted and observed blue-straggler populations are reduced.
  • Channels involving stable mass transfer contribute more to neutron-star binaries and to some gravitational-wave progenitors when mass-transfer efficiency is low.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same stability change could revise formation rates for other populations that rely on stable mass transfer, such as cataclysmic variables.
  • Orbital-period measurements of field blue stragglers would provide a direct test of the wider-orbit prediction.
  • The efficiency dependence implies that different mass-loss prescriptions could further shift the boundary between stable and unstable transfer.

Load-bearing premise

Modifying only the Roche-lobe response term while leaving every other part of the standard stability formalism unchanged is sufficient to capture the effect of non-conservative mass and angular-momentum loss on stability.

What would settle it

A direct comparison of the observed number and orbital-period distribution of blue stragglers in open clusters against the numbers produced by SEVN runs that use the new stability criterion versus the old one.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.30303 by A. Avdeeva, A. Turchi, D. Alvarez Garay, E. Leitinger, E. Pancino, E. Reggiani, G. Iorio, G. J. Escobar, L. Steinbauer, M. Echeveste, M. Mapelli, N. Sanna, S. Nedhath, S. Rani, S. Saracino.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Value of ζL as a function of mass ratio, q, and MT efficiency, β, assuming AML from the vicinity of the accretor. A reference level contour at 4.72, corresponding to the ζL value for MS donors in the HW formalism, is shown in red. 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 2 4 6 8 10 q AML donor 4.72 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 L [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Formation efficiency of BSSs produced through the merger of two MS stars (first scenario) as a function of the MT efficiency β. Each panel corresponds to a different age. Results obtained using the BD pre￾scription are shown in light purple, while those computed with the HW prescription are shown in dark purple. In all cases, angular momentum is assumed to be lost from the vicinity of the accretor. 0.0 0.5… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Mass ratio as a function of orbital period prior to the formation of BSSs via mergers at 0.5 Gyr. The left (right) panel corresponds to AML from the accretor (donor) star. The vertical dashed line at q = 3 corresponds to the upper limit at which MT is considered stable in the HW criterion. orbital period before merger for the BSSs formed under the BD and HW criteria at 0.5 Gyr. The larger number of BSSs ob… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the evolutionary history of two binary systems under the BD and HW MT stability criteria. The left side shows the case with AML from the accretor star and MT efficiency β = 0.5, while the right side corresponds to AML from the donor star and β = 0.2. The evolutionary state of the systems at 4 Gyr are highlighted with boxes. ence between the BD and HW criteria after the donor star leaves the M… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Histogram of the orbital period of BSSs with WD and non￾compact (NC) companions, with AML from the vicinity of the accretor at different ages. Models with the BD criterion appear in solid colors: blue for BSSs with WD companions and red for BSSs with NC compan￾ions. Models with the HW criterion appear as step-like lines: continuous blue line for BSSs with WD companions and dashed red line for BSSs with NC … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Formation efficiency of BBH, BHNS, and BNS systems for different MT efficiencies (β = 0.1, 0.5, 0.9) and stability prescriptions (BD and HW). The left and right columns correspond to AML from the vicinity of the accretor and the donor, respectively. In each panel, all BCO systems are shown to the left of the vertical dashed line, while GW progenitors are shown to the right. simulated until the formation o… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Relative fractions of BBH, BHNS, and BNS systems across formation channels (see Sect. 3.2), for different MT efficiencies (β = 0.1, 0.5, 0.9) and stability prescriptions (BD and HW). The left and right columns correspond to angular momentum loss from the vicinity of the accretor and the donor, respectively. In each panel, all BCO systems are shown to the left of the vertical dashed line, while GW progenit… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Mass-ratio and semi-major axis joint distributions at ZAMS for BBH (top panel), BHNS (middle panel), and BNS (bottom panel). Left panel: BD prescription. Right panel: HW prescription. The color scale represents the joint probability density distribution, normalized such that the integral over each panel is unity. Colors range from low (dark) to high (light) density. magnitude tighter. The strong concentra… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Context: The stability of mass transfer through Roche-lobe overflow plays a key role in shaping the outcome of binary interactions. However, the criterion for mass transfer stability remains one of the main open questions in the theory of binary evolution. Aims: We develop a mass transfer stability prescription that accounts for mass and angular momentum loss, and implement it in the population synthesis code SEVN. We assess its impact relative to the standard formalism used in SEVN, using blue stragglers and binary compact objects as illustrative cases. Methods: We derive an expression for the response of the Roche-lobe radius to mass loss in the general case where the mass and angular momentum of the system are not conserved. On the basis of this formulation, we construct a new mass transfer stability criterion that modifies the standard approach only through the Roche-lobe response term. Results: Population synthesis simulations with SEVN show that the new criterion allows stable mass transfer in binaries with higher donor-to-accretor mass ratios, leading to an overall increase in the predicted number of blue stragglers and promoting their formation in wider orbits. This contributes to reconciling the differences between theory and observations. For binary compact objects, the impact of the new stability criterion varies across system types, with the strongest effects occurring in binaries containing at least one neutron star. In particular, for low mass transfer efficiency, the new criterion enhances the contribution of channels involving stable mass transfer and leads to a larger number of systems, including gravitational wave progenitors. Conclusion: The inclusion of a new, simple, yet more consistent prescription for mass transfer stability has proven that refining this criterion can significantly improve our understanding of the formation channels of specific stellar populations.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives a generalized expression for the Roche-lobe radius response (d ln R_RL / d ln M_donor) that incorporates non-conservative mass-loss efficiency β and angular-momentum loss parameter γ. This single modified term is inserted into the standard stability criterion (ζ_donor < ζ_RL) without changes to the donor response or other formalism, and the resulting prescription is implemented in the SEVN population-synthesis code. Tests on blue stragglers and binary compact objects show that the new criterion permits stable mass transfer at higher donor-to-accretor mass ratios, increasing the predicted number of blue stragglers (especially in wider orbits) and altering formation channels for compact-object binaries, particularly those containing neutron stars under low mass-transfer efficiency.

Significance. If the central assumption holds, the work supplies a simple, parameter-light way to include non-conservative effects in stability criteria and demonstrates measurable impact on two observationally relevant populations. The SEVN implementation and the explicit focus on blue-straggler counts and gravitational-wave progenitors provide a concrete, falsifiable test of the prescription. Credit is due for the reproducible population-synthesis comparison and for isolating the effect to a single term rather than introducing new free parameters.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2] §2 (derivation of generalized ζ_RL): the manuscript replaces only the conservative Roche-lobe response while retaining the standard ζ_donor < ζ_RL threshold and the usual treatment of orbital angular-momentum loss; no explicit test is shown that coupled effects of instantaneous β on the effective mass ratio and on the specific angular momentum carried away do not require additional corrections to the stability condition itself.
  2. [Results (blue stragglers)] Results on blue stragglers (population-synthesis section): the reported increase in blue-straggler numbers and the shift to wider orbits are presented without comparison to detailed binary-evolution calculations or stellar-structure models that solve the full non-conservative mass-transfer problem; this validation step is load-bearing for the claim that the modified criterion reconciles theory and observations.
  3. [Results (binary compact objects)] Compact-object results: the statement that the strongest effects occur in neutron-star binaries and that stable-mass-transfer channels are enhanced is given without quantitative error analysis or sensitivity runs on β and γ, making it impossible to judge whether the reported changes exceed the uncertainties already present in SEVN.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] Notation for β and γ should be defined at first use and kept consistent with the standard literature (e.g., β as accreted fraction, γ as specific angular-momentum loss factor).
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the population-synthesis histograms should state the exact values of β and γ adopted in each run and whether the same random seeds were used for the conservative and non-conservative cases.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed report. We address each major comment below, proposing revisions where they strengthen the manuscript without altering its core claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§2] §2 (derivation of generalized ζ_RL): the manuscript replaces only the conservative Roche-lobe response while retaining the standard ζ_donor < ζ_RL threshold and the usual treatment of orbital angular-momentum loss; no explicit test is shown that coupled effects of instantaneous β on the effective mass ratio and on the specific angular momentum carried away do not require additional corrections to the stability condition itself.

    Authors: The derivation begins from the general expression for Roche-lobe radius under non-conservative mass transfer (β and γ) and yields a modified d ln R_RL / d ln M_donor that already folds in the instantaneous effects on orbital separation and mass ratio. The stability threshold is retained as ζ_donor < ζ_RL because this remains the definition of dynamical stability once the Roche-lobe response is correctly generalized; the orbital angular-momentum loss is handled by the existing SEVN equations. We therefore maintain that no further correction to the threshold is required. To clarify this point we will expand the discussion at the end of §2 with a short paragraph explaining why the coupled effects are captured within the present formulation. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results (blue stragglers)] Results on blue stragglers (population-synthesis section): the reported increase in blue-straggler numbers and the shift to wider orbits are presented without comparison to detailed binary-evolution calculations or stellar-structure models that solve the full non-conservative mass-transfer problem; this validation step is load-bearing for the claim that the modified criterion reconciles theory and observations.

    Authors: The study is a population-synthesis exploration whose purpose is to quantify the population-level consequences of the new criterion inside SEVN. Direct comparison with full non-conservative binary-evolution calculations would indeed provide stronger validation, but lies outside the scope of the present work. We will add an explicit limitations paragraph in the discussion section acknowledging this point and identifying it as desirable future work. The claim that the new criterion contributes to reconciling theory and observations is accordingly softened to reflect the population-synthesis nature of the evidence. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Results (binary compact objects)] Compact-object results: the statement that the strongest effects occur in neutron-star binaries and that stable-mass-transfer channels are enhanced is given without quantitative error analysis or sensitivity runs on β and γ, making it impossible to judge whether the reported changes exceed the uncertainties already present in SEVN.

    Authors: We already explore the low-efficiency regime explicitly, but agree that a systematic sensitivity study is needed. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection presenting results for a grid of β and γ values, together with a quantitative comparison of the induced changes against the dominant uncertainties already present in SEVN (common-envelope efficiency, supernova kicks, etc.). revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation of generalized Roche-lobe response is independent of its inputs

full rationale

The paper states it derives an expression for d ln R_RL / d ln M_donor incorporating mass-loss efficiency β and angular-momentum loss parameter γ, then substitutes this single modified term into the existing stability threshold ζ_donor < ζ_RL while leaving donor response and other formalism unchanged. No quoted step reduces the new criterion to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or tautological redefinition. The abstract and provided context contain no load-bearing self-citations or ansatzes smuggled via prior work by the same authors. This matches the default expectation of a self-contained derivation against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities beyond the standard assumptions of binary population synthesis; the new element is an analytic expression for the Roche-lobe response under mass and angular-momentum loss.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5924 in / 1237 out tokens · 36516 ms · 2026-06-30T03:48:38.385678+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 892, L3

    2020

  2. [2]

    P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2019, Phys. Rev. X, 9, 031040

    2019

  3. [3]

    D., Abraham, S., et al

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abraham, S., et al. 2021, Phys. Rev. X, 11, 021053

    2021

  4. [4]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 933

    Agrawal, P., Hurley, J., Stevenson, S., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 933

    2023

  5. [5]

    2020, MNRAS, 497, 4549

    Agrawal, P., Hurley, J., Stevenson, S., Szécsi, D., & Flynn, C. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 4549

    2020

  6. [6]

    J., Bavera, S

    Andrews, J. J., Bavera, S. S., Briel, M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.02376

    work page arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    H., & Terndrup, D

    Andronov, N., Pinsonneault, M. H., & Terndrup, D. M. 2006, ApJ, 646, 1160

    2006

  8. [8]

    2010, MNRAS, 402, 371

    Banerjee, S., Baumgardt, H., & Kroupa, P. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 371

    2010

  9. [9]

    S., Fragos, T., Zevin, M., et al

    Bavera, S. S., Fragos, T., Zevin, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A153

    2021

  10. [10]

    2002, ApJ, 572, 407

    Belczynski, K., Kalogera, V ., & Bulik, T. 2002, ApJ, 572, 407

    2002

  11. [11]

    A., et al

    Belczynski, K., Kalogera, V ., Rasio, F. A., et al. 2008, ApJS, 174, 223

    2008

  12. [12]

    E., et al

    Belczynski, K., Klencki, J., Fields, C. E., et al. 2020, A&A, 636, A104

    2020

  13. [13]

    P., Broekgaarden, F

    Boesky, A. P., Broekgaarden, F. S., & Berger, E. 2024, ApJ, 976, 24

    2024

  14. [14]

    2020, ApJ, 898, 71

    Breivik, K., Coughlin, S., Zevin, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 898, 71

    2020

  15. [15]

    2018, ApJ, 854, L1

    Breivik, K., Kremer, K., Bueno, M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, L1

    2018

  16. [16]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    2012

  17. [17]

    S., Berger, E., Neijssel, C

    Broekgaarden, F. S., Berger, E., Neijssel, C. J., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 5028

    2021

  18. [18]

    L., & Rasio, F

    Chatterjee, S., Rodriguez, C. L., & Rasio, F. A. 2017, ApJ, 834, 68

    2017

  19. [19]

    R., Bailes, M., & Broekgaarden, F

    Chattopadhyay, D., Stevenson, S., Hurley, J. R., Bailes, M., & Broekgaarden, F. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 3682

    2021

  20. [20]

    2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068

    Chen, Y ., Bressan, A., Girardi, L., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068

    2015

  21. [21]

    2016, ApJ, 823, 102

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102

    2016

  22. [22]

    Claeys, J. S. W., Pols, O. R., Izzard, R. G., Vink, J., & Verbunt, F. W. M. 2014, A&A, 563, A83

    2014

  23. [23]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 2891

    Costa, G., Mapelli, M., Iorio, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 2891

    2023

  24. [24]

    G., Bressan, A., et al

    Costa, G., Shepherd, K. G., Bressan, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A193 De Donder, E. & Vanbeveren, D. 2004, New A Rev., 48, 861 de Mink, S. E., Pols, O. R., & Hilditch, R. W. 2007, A&A, 467, 1181

    2025

  25. [25]

    & Toonen, S

    Dorozsmai, A. & Toonen, S. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3706

    2024

  26. [26]

    & Escobar, G

    Echeveste, M. & Escobar, G. J. 2026, AAA Workshop Series 14, in press

    2026

  27. [27]

    Eggleton, P. P. 1983, ApJ, 268, 368

    1983

  28. [28]

    J., Izzard, R

    Eldridge, J. J., Izzard, R. G., & Tout, C. A. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 1109

    2008

  29. [29]

    Eldridge, J. J. & Stanway, E. R. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 3302

    2016

  30. [30]

    J., Stanway, E

    Eldridge, J. J., Stanway, E. R., Xiao, L., et al. 2017, PASA, 34, e058

    2017

  31. [31]

    Escobar, G. J. & Echeveste, M. 2026, AAA Workshop Series 14, in press

    2026

  32. [32]

    J., Bavera, S

    Fragos, T., Andrews, J. J., Bavera, S. S., et al. 2023, ApJS, 264, 45

    2023

  33. [33]

    L., Belczynski, K., Wiktorowicz, G., et al

    Fryer, C. L., Belczynski, K., Wiktorowicz, G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 91 Article number, page 12 of 13 M. Echeveste et al.: MT stability inSEVN

    2012

  34. [34]

    & Han, Z

    Ge, H. & Han, Z. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.17333

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    S., Webbink, R

    Ge, H., Hjellming, M. S., Webbink, R. F., Chen, X., & Han, Z. 2010, ApJ, 717, 724

    2010

  36. [36]

    A., Chen, X., et al

    Ge, H., Tout, C. A., Chen, X., et al. 2022, ApJ, 933, 137

    2022

  37. [37]

    A., Chen, X., et al

    Ge, H., Tout, C. A., Chen, X., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, 7

    2023

  38. [38]

    F., Chen, X., & Han, Z

    Ge, H., Webbink, R. F., Chen, X., & Han, Z. 2015, ApJ, 812, 40

    2015

  39. [39]

    F., Chen, X., & Han, Z

    Ge, H., Webbink, R. F., Chen, X., & Han, Z. 2020, ApJ, 899, 132

    2020

  40. [40]

    M., Latham, D

    Geller, A. M., Latham, D. W., & Mathieu, R. D. 2015, AJ, 150, 97

    2015

  41. [41]

    Geller, A. M. & Mathieu, R. D. 2011, Nature, 478, 356

    2011

  42. [42]

    Geller, A. M. & Mathieu, R. D. 2012, AJ, 144, 54

    2012

  43. [43]

    & Mapelli, M

    Giacobbo, N. & Mapelli, M. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2011

    2018

  44. [44]

    & Mapelli, M

    Giacobbo, N. & Mapelli, M. 2020, ApJ, 891, 141

    2020

  45. [45]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 2959

    Giacobbo, N., Mapelli, M., & Spera, M. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 2959

    2018

  46. [46]

    M., Mathieu, R

    Gosnell, N. M., Mathieu, R. D., Geller, A. M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 814, 163

    2015

  47. [47]

    Hjellming, M. S. & Webbink, R. F. 1987, ApJ, 318, 794

    1987

  48. [48]

    R., Pols, O

    Hurley, J. R., Pols, O. R., Aarseth, S. J., & Tout, C. A. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 293

    2005

  49. [49]

    R., Pols, O

    Hurley, J. R., Pols, O. R., & Tout, C. A. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 543

    2000

  50. [50]

    R., Tout, C

    Hurley, J. R., Tout, C. A., & Pols, O. R. 2002, MNRAS, 329, 897

    2002

  51. [51]

    2023, MNRAS, 524, 426

    Iorio, G., Mapelli, M., Costa, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 426

    2023

  52. [52]

    2013, A&A Rev., 21, 59

    Ivanova, N., Justham, S., Chen, X., et al. 2013, A&A Rev., 21, 59

    2013

  53. [53]

    G., Dray, L

    Izzard, R. G., Dray, L. M., Karakas, A. I., Lugaro, M., & Tout, C. A. 2006, A&A, 460, 565

    2006

  54. [54]

    G., Glebbeek, E., Stancliffe, R

    Izzard, R. G., Glebbeek, E., Stancliffe, R. J., & Pols, O. R. 2009, A&A, 508, 1359

    2009

  55. [55]

    G., Preece, H., Jofre, P., et al

    Izzard, R. G., Preece, H., Jofre, P., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 2984

    2018

  56. [56]

    G., Tout, C

    Izzard, R. G., Tout, C. A., Karakas, A. I., & Pols, O. R. 2004, MNRAS, 350, 407

    2004

  57. [57]

    G., & Chruslinska, M

    Klencki, J., Nelemans, G., Istrate, A. G., & Chruslinska, M. 2021, A&A, 645, A54

    2021

  58. [58]

    G., & Pols, O

    Klencki, J., Nelemans, G., Istrate, A. G., & Pols, O. 2020, A&A, 638, A55

    2020

  59. [59]

    2009, Nature, 457, 288

    Knigge, C., Leigh, N., & Sills, A. 2009, Nature, 457, 288

    2009

  60. [60]

    2022, MNRAS, 515, 1228

    Korol, V ., Belokurov, V ., & Toonen, S. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 1228

    2022

  61. [61]

    2020, A&A, 638, A153

    Korol, V ., Toonen, S., Klein, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A153

    2020

  62. [62]

    S., Rui, N

    Kremer, K., Ye, C. S., Rui, N. Z., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 48

    2020

  63. [63]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

    Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

    2001

  64. [64]

    U., Tauris, T

    Kruckow, M. U., Tauris, T. M., Langer, N., Kramer, M., & Izzard, R. G. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 1908

    2018

  65. [65]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 9480

    Lecroq, M., Charlot, S., Bressan, A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 9480

    2024

  66. [66]

    Leiner, E. M. & Geller, A. 2021, ApJ, 908, 229

    2021

  67. [67]

    2025, Phys

    Li, L., Lü, G., Zhu, C., et al. 2025, Phys. Rev. D, 112, 103005

    2025

  68. [68]

    2023, A&A, 669, A82

    Li, Z., Chen, X., Ge, H., Chen, H.-L., & Han, Z. 2023, A&A, 669, A82

    2023

  69. [69]

    J., van der Sluys, M

    Loveridge, A. J., van der Sluys, M. V ., & Kalogera, V . 2011, ApJ, 743, 49

    2011

  70. [70]

    2017, MNRAS, 472, 2422

    Mapelli, M., Giacobbo, N., Ripamonti, E., & Spera, M. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 2422

    2017

  71. [71]

    2020, ApJ, 888, 76

    Mapelli, M., Spera, M., Montanari, E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 888, 76

    2020

  72. [72]

    Marchant, P., Pappas, K. M. W., Gallegos-Garcia, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 650, A107 Marín Pina, D., Rastello, S., Gieles, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, L2

    2021

  73. [73]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.06311

    Marinacci, F., Baldi, M., Iorio, G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.06311

    work page arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Mathieu, R. D. & Geller, A. M. 2009, Nature, 462, 1032

    2009

  75. [75]

    McCrea, W. H. 1964, MNRAS, 128, 147

    1964

  76. [76]

    2024, A&A, 690, A106

    Mestichelli, B., Mapelli, M., Torniamenti, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A106

    2024

  77. [77]

    J., Vigna-Gómez, A., Stevenson, S., et al

    Neijssel, C. J., Vigna-Gómez, A., Stevenson, S., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3740

    2019

  78. [78]

    R., Portegies Zwart, S

    Nelemans, G., Yungelson, L. R., Portegies Zwart, S. F., & Verbunt, F. 2001, A&A, 365, 491

    2001

  79. [79]

    D., Wood, P

    Nie, J. D., Wood, P. R., & Nicholls, C. P. 2012, MNRAS, 423, 2764

    2012

  80. [80]

    H., Dent, T., Davies, G

    Nitz, A. H., Dent, T., Davies, G. S., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 891, 123

    2020

Showing first 80 references.