pith. sign in

arxiv: 2407.18319 · v2 · pith:IPVNJU3Fnew · submitted 2024-07-25 · 🌀 gr-qc

Gravitational wave surrogate model for spinning, intermediate mass ratio binaries based on perturbation theory and numerical relativity

Katie Rink , Ritesh Bachhar , Tousif Islam , Nur E. M. Rifat , Kevin Gonzalez-Quesada , Scott E. Field , Gaurav Khanna , Scott A. Hughes
show 1 more author
Vijay Varma
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 23:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc
keywords gravitational wave surrogateblack hole perturbation theorynumerical relativity calibrationintermediate mass ratio binariesaligned spinreduced order modelquasi-normal modes
0
0 comments X

The pith

A surrogate model trained on perturbation theory and calibrated with numerical relativity reproduces gravitational waveforms from spinning black hole binaries at intermediate mass ratios.

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

This paper builds a reduced-order surrogate called BHPTNRSur2dq1e3 for gravitational waves from binary black holes that carry aligned spin on the heavier body. It trains the surrogate on point-particle black hole perturbation theory waveforms that span mass ratios from 3 to 1000 and spins from -0.8 to 0.8, then adjusts the model using numerical relativity data only in the range 3 to 10. A domain decomposition step is added to treat the inspiral separately from the merger-ringdown when retrograde modes appear. The resulting model reproduces its training waveforms to a median mismatch of 8 times 10 to the minus 5 and, after calibration, matches numerical relativity at mass ratio 15 to roughly 10 to the minus 3 in the dominant modes.

Core claim

The central claim is that BHPTNRSur2dq1e3, trained on ppBHPT waveforms across 3 less than or equal to q less than or equal to 1000 and minus 0.8 less than or equal to chi1 less than or equal to 0.8, reproduces those waveforms with median time-domain mismatch 8 times 10 to the minus 5; after numerical relativity calibration performed only for 3 less than or equal to q less than or equal to 10 the model agrees with spin-aligned NR at q equals 15 to better than 10 to the minus 3 in the dominant quadrupolar modes and 10 to the minus 2 in subdominant modes, with mismatch below 10 to the minus 2 across the window 6 less than or equal to q less than or equal to 15.

What carries the argument

The reduced-order surrogate BHPTNRSur2dq1e3 built from ppBHPT training data with a domain decomposition that models inspiral and merger-ringdown separately to handle excited retrograde quasi-normal modes.

If this is right

  • The NR-calibrated model achieves mismatch errors below 10 to the minus 2 for mass ratios between 6 and 15.
  • Mismatch errors typically decrease further at larger mass ratios within the calibrated window.
  • Both the pure ppBHPT surrogate and the NR-calibrated version are released publicly through existing waveform libraries.
  • The model covers all spin-weighted spherical harmonic modes up to ell equals 4 except the (4,1) and m equals 0 modes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same calibration strategy could be tested against additional NR runs at mass ratios between 15 and 30 to check how far the extrapolation holds before errors from the plunge approximation dominate.
  • Because the model already includes retrograde quasi-normal mode handling, it may serve as a starting point for extending aligned-spin models to modest precession.
  • Public release allows immediate insertion into parameter-estimation pipelines that target intermediate-mass-ratio events expected in future detector data.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that numerical relativity calibration performed only between mass ratios 3 and 10 continues to control the errors when the model is applied at mass ratios up to 15 or higher, with the main remaining discrepancies coming from the transition-to-plunge and ringdown approximations inside perturbation theory.

What would settle it

A new numerical relativity simulation at mass ratio 15 or 20 with aligned spin would show whether the model's predicted mismatch remains below 10 to the minus 2 or grows larger.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2407.18319 by Gaurav Khanna, Katie Rink, Kevin Gonzalez-Quesada, Nur E. M. Rifat, Ritesh Bachhar, Scott A. Hughes, Scott E. Field, Tousif Islam, Vijay Varma.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The parameter space sampled by our waveform train [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: offers us an understanding of how our training data behaves as we vary the spin at a fixed mass ratio. The data has already been aligned according to the pro￾cedure described in Sec. III A. As the figure shows, one of the main challenges will be accurately modeling the ring￾down [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Leave-one-out cross-validation (out-of-sample) errors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Leave-one-out cross-validation (out-of-sample) error for our surrogate of ppBHPT waveforms assessed for the individual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Errors in our ppBHPT surrogate waveform model assessed for the individual modes (2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The numerical truncation error (blue circles) esti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. A comparison between waveforms computed by point particle black hole perturbation theory (ppBHPT) to numerical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. The time domain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Model calibration results when solving the opti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Heatmap of the time domain relative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. NR surrogate model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. NR surrogate model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. The absolute value of the Fourier transform of a ringdown signal, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. The absolute value of the Fourier transform of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. Estimated error in measuring the time at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_17.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present BHPTNRSur2dq1e3, a reduced order surrogate model of gravitational waves emitted from binary black hole (BBH) systems in the comparable to large mass ratio regime with aligned spin ($\chi_1$) on the heavier mass ($m_1$). We trained this model on waveform data generated from point particle black hole perturbation theory (ppBHPT) with mass ratios varying from $3 \leq q \leq 1000$ and spins from $-0.8 \leq \chi_1 \leq 0.8$. The waveforms are $13,500 \ m_1$ long and include all spin-weighted spherical harmonic modes up to $\ell = 4$ except the $(4,1)$ and $m = 0$ modes. We find that for binaries with $\chi_1 \lesssim -0.5$, retrograde quasi-normal modes are significantly excited, thereby complicating the modeling process. To overcome this issue, we introduce a domain decomposition approach to model the inspiral and merger-ringdown portion of the signal separately. The resulting model can faithfully reproduce ppBHPT waveforms with a median time-domain mismatch error of $8 \times 10^{-5}$. We then calibrate our model with numerical relativity (NR) data in the comparable mass regime $(3 \leq q \leq 10)$. By comparing with spin-aligned BBH NR simulations at $q = 15$, we find that the dominant quadrupolar (subdominant) modes agree to better than $\approx 10^{-3} \ (\approx 10^{-2})$ when using a time-domain mismatch error, where the largest source of calibration error comes from the transition-to-plunge and ringdown approximations of perturbation theory. Mismatch errors are below $\approx 10^{-2}$ for systems with mass ratios between $6 \leq q \leq 15$ and typically get smaller at larger mass ratio. Our two models - both the ppBHPT waveform model and the NR-calibrated ppBHPT model - will be publicly available through gwsurrogate and the Black Hole Perturbation Toolkit packages.

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 presents BHPTNRSur2dq1e3, a reduced-order surrogate model for gravitational waveforms from aligned-spin binary black holes with mass ratios from 3 to 1000. It is trained on point-particle black hole perturbation theory (ppBHPT) waveforms including modes up to ℓ=4 (excluding (4,1) and m=0), with a domain decomposition approach to handle retrograde quasi-normal modes for χ1 ≲ -0.5. The model reproduces ppBHPT waveforms with median mismatch 8×10^{-5}. After calibration to numerical relativity (NR) data for 3≤q≤10, it is compared to NR at q=15, showing agreement of ~10^{-3} for dominant modes and ~10^{-2} for subdominant, with mismatches below 10^{-2} for 6≤q≤15 and claimed to decrease at higher q. The largest calibration errors are attributed to transition-to-plunge and ringdown in perturbation theory. Both the ppBHPT and NR-calibrated models are to be made public.

Significance. If the extrapolation of the NR calibration holds, this work provides a valuable bridge between numerical relativity and perturbation theory for intermediate mass ratio inspirals, enabling modeling of systems inaccessible to either method alone. The inclusion of multiple modes, public release through gwsurrogate and Black Hole Perturbation Toolkit, and the use of reduced-order modeling are strengths. The domain decomposition for retrograde modes addresses a specific challenge in the modeling.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The NR calibration is performed only in the window 3≤q≤10, yet the model is presented for q up to 1000. The sole direct NR comparison is at q=15; the assertion that 'mismatch errors ... typically get smaller at larger mass ratio' is an extrapolation whose validity is not independently verified within the manuscript. This is load-bearing for the claimed accuracy at high mass ratios.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The domain decomposition approach for χ1 ≲ -0.5 is introduced to handle retrograde QNMs, but without details on the choice of domain boundaries, matching conditions, or validation of waveform continuity across domains, it is difficult to assess the robustness of this procedure for the full parameter space.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The abstract states waveforms are 13,500 m1 long; clarify if this is the total length or the inspiral portion, and specify the starting frequency or time.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and constructive comments. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The NR calibration is performed only in the window 3≤q≤10, yet the model is presented for q up to 1000. The sole direct NR comparison is at q=15; the assertion that 'mismatch errors ... typically get smaller at larger mass ratio' is an extrapolation whose validity is not independently verified within the manuscript. This is load-bearing for the claimed accuracy at high mass ratios.

    Authors: We agree that the NR calibration window is limited to 3≤q≤10 with a single direct comparison at q=15, and that the statement on mismatch errors decreasing at larger q constitutes an extrapolation. In the revised manuscript we will qualify the abstract wording to read 'mismatch errors are below ≈10^{-2} for 6≤q≤15 and are expected to decrease at larger mass ratios based on the observed trend and the increasing accuracy of perturbation theory.' We will also add a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section explaining the physical basis for the expected improvement while explicitly noting the absence of further NR validation points. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The domain decomposition approach for χ1 ≲ -0.5 is introduced to handle retrograde QNMs, but without details on the choice of domain boundaries, matching conditions, or validation of waveform continuity across domains, it is difficult to assess the robustness of this procedure for the full parameter space.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this point. Although the current manuscript describes the domain decomposition in Section 4.2, we agree that explicit details on boundary selection, matching conditions, and continuity validation are needed. In the revision we will expand that section to specify the spin-dependent criteria and numerical values for domain boundaries, the functional form of the matching conditions, and quantitative tests (including waveform and derivative continuity) across representative cases, supported by additional figures where appropriate. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; accuracy claims rest on direct comparisons to independent external ppBHPT and NR datasets

full rationale

The derivation trains a reduced-order surrogate on ppBHPT waveforms (q=3 to 1000) and calibrates coefficients against NR data only in 3≤q≤10, then reports time-domain mismatches by explicit comparison to those same external waveform sets (median 8e-5 on ppBHPT; ~1e-3/1e-2 at q=15 NR). These mismatch quantities are computed from the difference between the model output and the independent simulation data; they are not algebraically identical to any fitted parameter or defined in terms of the surrogate itself. No equations, domain-decomposition ansatz, or self-citation chain reduces the reported errors to the inputs by construction. The statement that mismatches 'typically get smaller at larger mass ratio' is an empirical observation from the validation data rather than a tautological claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of ppBHPT waveforms as training data for q up to 1000, the effectiveness of the domain decomposition for retrograde modes, and the transferability of NR calibration from q=3–10 to higher mass ratios.

free parameters (2)
  • reduced-order surrogate coefficients
    The model is a reduced-order surrogate trained on 13,500 m1-long waveforms, requiring many fitted coefficients to represent the training set.
  • domain decomposition boundaries
    Choice of split between inspiral and merger-ringdown segments for negative spins is a modeling choice fitted to the data.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Point-particle black hole perturbation theory supplies sufficiently accurate waveforms for mass ratios 3 ≤ q ≤ 1000
    The entire training set is generated from ppBHPT.
  • domain assumption Numerical relativity data in 3 ≤ q ≤ 10 can be used to calibrate and extrapolate the model to q = 1000
    Calibration is performed only in the comparable-mass window.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5967 in / 1433 out tokens · 29958 ms · 2026-05-23T23:36:31.480287+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 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Radiation outer boundary conditions and near-to-far field signal transformations for the Bardeen-Press equation

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Exact transparent radiation boundary conditions and near-to-far field teleportation kernels are derived for the Bardeen-Press equation, approximated via exponential sums with error bounds, and shown to eliminate late-...

  2. Shaving off soft hairs and the black hole image memory effect

    gr-qc 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Soft-haired Kerr black holes show rotated, dilated, drifting images and an image memory effect when soft hair changes via waves, with the effect scaling with the large black hole's mass and spin.

  3. Primordial black holes versus their impersonators at gravitational wave observatories

    astro-ph.CO 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Fisher-matrix forecasts show Cosmic Explorer and Einstein Telescope can probe sub-solar PBHs to z~3 and distinguish PBHs from neutron stars up to z~0.2 via lack of tidal deformability.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 121 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers · 37 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Advanced LIGO

    J. Aasi et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration), Class. Quant. Grav. 32, 074001 (2015), arXiv:1411.4547 [gr- qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    Advanced Virgo: a 2nd generation interferometric gravitational wave detector

    F. Acernese et al. (Virgo Collaboration), Class. Quant. Grav. 32, 024001 (2015), arXiv:1408.3978 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  3. [3]

    Akutsu et al

    T. Akutsu et al. (KAGRA Collaboration), PTEP 2021, 05A101 (2021), arXiv:2005.05574 [physics.ins-det]

    work page arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. X 9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run

    R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collabora- tion), Phys. Rev. X11, 021053 (2021), arXiv:2010.14527 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    GWTC-2.1: Deep Extended Catalog of Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run

    R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Col- laboration), Phys. Rev. D 109, 022001 (2024), arXiv:2108.01045 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the Second Part of the Third Observing Run

    R. Abbott et al. (LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Collaboration), Phys. Rev. X 13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr- qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Abbott et al

    R. Abbott et al. (LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Collaboration), The Astrophysical Journal Letters 896, L44 (2020)

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

    N. Afshordi et al. (LISA Consortium Waveform Working Group), (2023), arXiv:2311.01300 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  10. [10]

    Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO

    D. Reitze et al., Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 035 (2019), arXiv:1907.04833 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  11. [11]

    Punturo et al

    M. Punturo et al. , Class. Quant. Grav. 27, 194002 (2010)

    work page 2010

  12. [12]

    P¨ urrer and C.-J

    M. P¨ urrer and C.-J. Haster, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023151 (2020), arXiv:1912.10055 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  13. [13]

    Ferguson et al

    D. Ferguson et al. , Phys. Rev. D 104, 044037 (2021) (2020), 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.044037, arXiv:2006.04272

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.044037 2021

  14. [14]

    Second maya catalog of binary black hole numerical relativity waveforms,

    D. Ferguson et al. , “Second maya catalog of binary black hole numerical relativity waveforms,” (2023), arXiv:2309.00262 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    A. H. Mroue et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 241104 (2013), arXiv:1304.6077 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  16. [16]

    Boyle et al

    M. Boyle et al. , Classical and Quantum Gravity 36, 195006 (2019)

    work page 2019

  17. [17]

    L¨ offleret al

    F. L¨ offleret al. , Classical and Quantum Gravity 29, 115001 (2012)

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    Georgia Tech Catalog of Gravitational Waveforms

    K. Jani et al. , Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 204001 (2016), arXiv:1605.03204 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    The RIT binary black hole simulations catalog

    J. Healy et al., Class. Quant. Grav. 34, 224001 (2017), arXiv:1703.03423 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    The second RIT binary black hole simulations catalog and its application to gravitational waves parameter estimation

    J. Healy et al. , Phys. Rev. D 100, 024021 (2019), arXiv:1901.02553 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    Healy and C

    J. Healy and C. O. Lousto, Phys. Rev. D 102, 104018 (2020), arXiv:2007.07910 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    Healy and C

    J. Healy and C. O. Lousto, Phys. Rev. D 105, 124010 (2022), arXiv:2202.00018 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Neilsen et al., Bulletin of the American Physical So- ciety (2022)

    D. Neilsen et al., Bulletin of the American Physical So- ciety (2022)

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Yoo et al

    J. Yoo et al. , Phys. Rev. D 106, 044001 (2022), arXiv:2203.10109 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  25. [25]

    Nu- merical simulations of extreme mass ratio binary black holes,

    M. Giesler, M. A. Scheel, and S. A. Teukolsky, “Nu- merical simulations of extreme mass ratio binary black holes,” (2022), in preparation

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    C. O. Lousto and J. Healy, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 191102 (2020), arXiv:2006.04818 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  27. [27]

    J. R. Gair et al. , Gen. Rel. Grav. 43, 485 (2011), arXiv:0907.5450 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  28. [28]

    Where are the Intermediate Mass Black Holes?

    J. Bellovary, A. Brooks, M. Colpi, M. Eracleous, K. Holley-Bockelmann, A. Hornschemeier, L. Mayer, P. Natarajan, J. Slutsky, and M. Tremmel, arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.08144 (2019)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1903

  29. [29]

    Intermediate and Extreme Mass-Ratio Inspirals -- Astrophysics, Science Applications and Detection using LISA

    P. Amaro-Seoane et al. , Class. Quant. Grav. 24, R113 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0703495

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  30. [30]

    D. R. Pasham et al. , Science Advances 10, eadj8898 (2024)

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    A. K. Mehta et al., The Astrophysical Journal 924, 39 (2022)

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    McKernan et al., Mon

    B. McKernan et al., Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 494, 1203 (2020), arXiv:1907.04356 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  33. [33]

    The motion of a system of bodies under the influence of their mutual attraction, according to einstein’s theory,

    H. A. Lorentz and J. Droste, “The motion of a system of bodies under the influence of their mutual attraction, according to einstein’s theory,” (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 1937) pp. 330–355

    work page 1937

  34. [34]

    Post-Newtonian Theory for Gravitational Waves

    L. Blanchet, Living Rev. Rel. 17, 2 (2014), arXiv:1310.1528 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  35. [35]

    S. A. Teukolsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 29, 1114 (1972)

    work page 1972

  36. [36]

    Buonanno and T

    A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Phys. Rev. D 59, 084006 (1999). 19

    work page 1999

  37. [37]

    An improved effective-one-body model of spinning, nonprecessing binary black holes for the era of gravitational-wave astrophysics with advanced detectors

    A. Boh´ e et al. , Phys. Rev. D 95, 044028 (2017), arXiv:1611.03703 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  38. [38]

    Cotesta, A

    R. Cotesta et al. , Phys. Rev. D 98, 084028 (2018), arXiv:1803.10701 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2018

  39. [39]

    Fre- quency domain reduced order model of aligned-spin effective- one-body waveforms with higher-order modes,

    R. Cotesta, S. Marsat, and M. P¨ urrer, Phys. Rev. D 101, 124040 (2020), arXiv:2003.12079 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  40. [40]

    Inspiral-merger-ringdown waveforms of spinning, precessing black-hole binaries in the effective-one-body formalism

    Y. Pan et al. , Phys. Rev. D 89, 084006 (2014), arXiv:1307.6232 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  41. [41]

    Validating the effective-one-body model of spinning, precessing binary black holes against numerical relativity

    S. Babak, A. Taracchini, and A. Buonanno, Phys. Rev. D 95, 024010 (2017), arXiv:1607.05661 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  42. [42]

    Ossokine et al., Multipolar Effective-One-Body Waveforms for Precessing Binary Black Holes: Construction and Valida- tion, Phys

    S. Ossokine et al. , Phys. Rev. D 102, 044055 (2020), arXiv:2004.09442 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  43. [43]

    A new effective-one-body description of coalescing nonprecessing spinning black-hole binaries

    T. Damour and A. Nagar, Phys. Rev. D 90, 044018 (2014), arXiv:1406.6913 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  44. [44]

    Nagar et al

    A. Nagar et al. , Phys. Rev. D 101, 024041 (2020), arXiv:1904.09550 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  45. [45]

    Nagar et al

    A. Nagar et al. , Phys. Rev. D 102, 024077 (2020), arXiv:2001.09082 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

    Riemenschneider et al

    G. Riemenschneider et al. , Phys. Rev. D 104, 104045 (2021), arXiv:2104.07533 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    Khalil et al

    M. Khalil et al. , Phys. Rev. D 108, 124036 (2023), arXiv:2303.18143 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    Pompili et al

    L. Pompili et al. , Phys. Rev. D 108, 124035 (2023), arXiv:2303.18039 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  49. [49]

    Ramos-Buades, A

    A. Ramos-Buades et al. , Phys. Rev. D 108, 124037 (2023), arXiv:2303.18046 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    van de Meent, A

    M. van de Meent et al. , Phys. Rev. D 108, 124038 (2023), arXiv:2303.18026 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Ajith et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity 24, S689 (2007)

    P. Ajith et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity 24, S689 (2007)

    work page 2007

  52. [52]

    Frequency-domain gravitational waves from non-precessing black-hole binaries. I. New numerical waveforms and anatomy of the signal

    S. Husa et al. , Phys. Rev. D 93, 044006 (2016), arXiv:1508.07250 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  53. [53]

    Frequency-domain gravitational waves from non-precessing black-hole binaries. II. A phenomenological model for the advanced detector era

    S. Khan et al. , Phys. Rev. D 93, 044007 (2016), arXiv:1508.07253 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  54. [54]

    First higher-multipole model of gravitational waves from spinning and coalescing black-hole binaries

    L. London et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 161102 (2018), arXiv:1708.00404 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  55. [55]

    Khan et al

    S. Khan et al. , Phys. Rev. D 100, 024059 (2019), arXiv:1809.10113 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  56. [56]

    A simple model of complete precessing black-hole-binary gravitational waveforms

    M. Hannam et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 151101 (2014), arXiv:1308.3271 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  57. [57]

    Khan et al

    S. Khan et al. , Phys. Rev. D 101, 024056 (2020), arXiv:1911.06050 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  58. [58]

    Computationally efficient models for the dominant and sub-dominant harmonic modes of precessing binary black holes

    G. Pratten et al. , Phys. Rev. D 103, 104056 (2021), arXiv:2004.06503 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  59. [59]

    Estell´ eset al

    H. Estell´ eset al. , Phys. Rev. D 103, 124060 (2021), arXiv:2004.08302 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  60. [60]

    Estell´ eset al

    H. Estell´ eset al. , Phys. Rev. D 105, 084039 (2022), arXiv:2012.11923 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  61. [61]

    Estell´ eset al

    H. Estell´ eset al. , Phys. Rev. D 105, 084040 (2022), arXiv:2105.05872 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  62. [62]

    Hamilton et al

    E. Hamilton et al. , Phys. Rev. D 104, 124027 (2021), arXiv:2107.08876 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  63. [63]

    S. E. Field et al., prx 4, 031006 (2014), arXiv:1308.3565 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  64. [64]

    Fast and accurate prediction of numerical relativity waveforms from binary black hole coalescences using surrogate models

    J. Blackman et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 121102 (2015), arXiv:1502.07758 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  65. [65]

    A Surrogate Model of Gravitational Waveforms from Numerical Relativity Simulations of Precessing Binary Black Hole Mergers

    J. Blackman et al. , Phys. Rev. D95, 104023 (2017), arXiv:1701.00550 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  66. [66]

    A Numerical Relativity Waveform Surrogate Model for Generically Precessing Binary Black Hole Mergers

    J. Blackman et al. , Phys. Rev. D96, 024058 (2017), arXiv:1705.07089 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  67. [68]

    Surrogate models for precessing binary black hole simulations with unequal masses

    V. Varma et al., Phys. Rev. Research. 1, 033015 (2019), arXiv:1905.09300 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  68. [69]

    N. E. Rifat et al. , Phys. Rev. D 101, 081502 (2020), arXiv:1910.10473 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  69. [70]

    Islam et al

    T. Islam et al. , arXiv:2204.01972 (2022), 10.48550/ARXIV.2204.01972

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2204.01972 2022

  70. [71]

    P. A. Sundararajan, G. Khanna, and S. A. Hughes, Physical Review D 76, 104005 (2007)

    work page 2007

  71. [72]

    P. A. Sundararajan et al., Physical Review D78, 024022 (2008)

    work page 2008

  72. [73]

    P. A. Sundararajan, G. Khanna, and S. A. Hughes, Physical Review D 81, 104009 (2010)

    work page 2010

  73. [74]

    Zengino˘ glu and G

    A. Zengino˘ glu and G. Khanna, Physical Review X 1, 021017 (2011)

    work page 2011

  74. [76]

    gwsurrogate,

    J. Blackman et al. , “gwsurrogate,” (2024), https:// pypi.python.org/pypi/gwsurrogate/

    work page 2024

  75. [77]

    Ori and K

    A. Ori and K. S. Thorne, Physical Review D 62, 124022 (2000)

    work page 2000

  76. [78]

    S. A. Hughes, A. Apte, G. Khanna, and H. Lim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 161101 (2019), arXiv:1901.05900 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  77. [79]

    Apte and S

    A. Apte and S. A. Hughes, Physical Review D 100 (2019), 10.1103/physrevd.100.084031

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.084031 2019

  78. [80]

    Fujita and H

    R. Fujita and H. Tagoshi, Progress of Theoretical Physics 112, 415 (2004), http://oup.prod.sis.lan/ptp/article- pdf/112/3/415/5382220/112-3-415.pdf

    work page 2004

  79. [81]

    Fujita and H

    R. Fujita and H. Tagoshi, Progress of Theoretical Physics 113, 1165 (2005), http://oup.prod.sis.lan/ptp/article- pdf/113/6/1165/5285582/113-6-1165.pdf

    work page 2005

  80. [82]

    S. Mano, H. Suzuki, and E. Takasugi, Progress of Theoretical Physics 95, 1079 (1996), http://oup.prod.sis.lan/ptp/article- pdf/95/6/1079/5282662/95-6-1079.pdf

    work page 1996

Showing first 80 references.