Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Actions of spinning compact binaries: Spinning particle in Kerr matched to dynamics at 1.5 post-Newtonian order

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that action variables of spinning binaries and spinning test particles in Kerr coincide up to an integer lattice transformation, providing a gauge-invariant dictionary between the post-Newtonian and self-force…

desk verdict Closed-form Kerr actions and frequencies are a solid, publishable contribution; the PN/self-force dictionary is a well-motivated conjecture that leans on an ad hoc regularization. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.09742 v3 pith:2K7AKL2O submitted 2024-11-14 gr-qc

Vojtěch Witzany , Viktor Skoupý , Leo C. Stein , Sashwat Tanay This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc MSC 83C1083C5770H0670H15 PACS 04.25.-g04.30.-w04.70.-s
keywords action-anglevariablesspinningbinariespost-NewtonianKerrspacetimetestparticlesgravitationalself-forceellipticintegralswaves
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish a gauge-invariant bridge between the two main analytical descriptions of spinning compact binaries: post-Newtonian dynamics at finite mass ratio, and a spinning test particle in Kerr space-time, the basis of self-force and extreme-mass-ratio calculations. The bridge is a discrete relation between the action variables of the two systems: $I_r=J_r$, $I_L=J_z+|J_\phi|-(J_\psi+s)$, $I_{\Delta J}=J_\phi$, and $I_5=J_\psi+s$, together with the corresponding frequency relations. To reach it, the authors derive the first closed-form expressions, in Legendre elliptic integrals, for the actions and fundamental frequencies of a spinning test particle in Kerr at linear order in the secondary spin, and the first closed-form 1.5PN action-angle Hamiltonian for eccentric, precessing binaries. If the dictionary holds at higher orders, a single integrable description could interpolate between comparable-mass binaries and extreme-mass-ratio inspirals with generic spin precession.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the five action variables of each system, defined as loop integrals of the Poincaré–Cartan form over the homotopy classes of the invariant torus. On the Kerr side, the actions are computed from the Hamilton–Jacobi solution for a spinning particle built on the Marck tetrad congruence (a tetrad adapted to parallel transport along reference geodesics) and reduced to Legendre elliptic integrals ($K$, $E$, $\Pi$); on the binary side, they come from the integrable 1.5PN Hamiltonian with its five actions $J_r,J_L,J_J,J_z,J_5$. The identity carrying the argument is the integer-lattice transform (93)–(96), and the technical device enabling the match is the regularized replacement for $\vec{L}\cdot\vec{S}_1$ in Eq. (78), which is required to reproduce the aligned-spin coupling in both the $L\gg S_1$ and $S_1\gg L\gg S_2$ limits.

What would settle it

Compute the 2PN action-angle Hamiltonian for spinning finite-mass-ratio binaries and compare it with the 2PN expansion of the spinning-particle actions from this paper: if the dictionary (93)–(96) does not reproduce the 2PN Hamiltonian order by order, the claimed all-order correspondence is false. The authors themselves flag that going to 2PN may show the regularization of Eq. (78) is not allowed at that order.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the invariant actions of a spinning particle in Kerr and those of a spinning binary at 1.5 post-Newtonian order are one and the same set of tori, related by a unimodular integer matrix (Eqs. 93–96), and that this correspondence, including the induced frequency relations (Eqs. 101–104), holds for any integrable dynamics smoothly connecting the two limits at finite mass ratio and higher PN order. The dictionary is obtained by expanding the new closed-form spinning-particle actions in the PN limit and, independently, by reducing the 1.5PN finite-mass-ratio action-angle Hamiltonian to the spinning test particle limit, then requiring the two Hamiltonians to agree order by order. Because alternative action variables on an invariant torus can differ only by discrete lattice transformations, the integer coefficients found at leading order cannot vary continuously, so the match is argued to be exact wherever the two regimes overlap.

Load-bearing premise

Nothing in the matching works without the ad hoc replacement for the scalar product of the orbital and primary spin angular momenta, Eq. (78), which is only checked in the two extreme limits and adds terms of formally 2PN order; if that replacement proves incompatible with 2PN dynamics, the dictionary is not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The dictionary (93)–(96) gives a gauge-invariant, coordinate-independent connection between post-Newtonian spinning-binary dynamics and Kerr test-particle dynamics for generic precessing configurations, going beyond aligned-spin matchings.
  • The frequency relations (101)–(104) follow from the action matching and allow direct comparison of Fourier-extracted fundamental frequencies from numerical relativity, self-force, and PN computations.
  • The closed-form expressions for the geodesic and spin-corrected actions (Eqs. 34, 35, 40, 41) make the fundamental frequencies of spinning particles in Kerr directly computable, useful for frequency-domain gravitational-wave flux calculations.
  • The corrected 1.5PN action-angle Hamiltonian (Eq. 76) is the first closed-form such Hamiltonian for eccentric, precessing spinning binaries at finite mass ratio.
  • Because actions between overlapping integrable regimes can change only by discrete integer transforms, the match is claimed to persist at finite mass ratios and at higher PN orders.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the dictionary resummizes beyond 1.5PN, it points toward an effective-one-body model built on a deformed Kerr metric whose actions are exactly those of the binary, which would cover fully precessing inspirals rather than aligned ones.
  • The frequency identity $\tilde{\Omega}_L=\Omega_z$ could be tested directly by Fourier-analyzing a numerical-relativity simulation of a precessing intermediate-mass-ratio binary.
  • The non-commutation of the PN and test-particle limits, and the need for a hand-made regularization, suggest that a fully systematic 2PN dictionary will require first-order-in-mass-ratio corrections to the test-particle symplectic structure, since part of the primary-spin dynamics is screened out by the test-particle limit.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a gauge-invariant dictionary between the action-angle descriptions of a spinning test particle in Kerr spacetime and of a spinning compact binary at 1.5 post-Newtonian order. The authors first derive closed-form expressions, in terms of Legendre elliptic integrals, for the actions of a spinning test particle in Kerr to linear order in the particle spin, together with an action-based method for the fundamental frequencies. These formulas are verified numerically against independent Fourier-based results. The paper then expands the spinning-particle Hamiltonian in actions up to 3PN and compares it with the 1.5PN action-angle Hamiltonian of Tanay et al., correcting a previous expression for the fifth action. In the overlapping test-particle/PN regime, the authors propose an integer lattice transformation (Eqs. 93--96) relating the two sets of actions and derive the corresponding frequency relations (101)--(104), with the goal of providing an interpolation dictionary for spinning binaries across mass ratios and PN orders.

Significance. If the dictionary is correct, this is a substantial step toward a geometric, gauge-invariant connection between post-Newtonian and self-force descriptions of spinning binaries, with clear potential utility for effective-one-body modeling of precessing systems. The action and frequency results for spinning test particles in Kerr are a significant technical achievement in themselves: they provide the first closed-form Legendre expressions for the geodesic actions, extend them linearly in spin, and benchmark them against independent numerical computations (Fig. 2, Appendix B.3). The paper also delivers the first closed-form 1.5PN action-angle Hamiltonian for eccentric, precessing spinning binaries, and it openly corrects an earlier formula for the fifth action. These parts are careful and well-documented. The main risk is concentrated in the matching section, where the central dictionary rests on a regularized expression for L·S1 that is asserted rather than derived, and on fixing lattice coefficients that are not fully determined by the matching equations.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section V.B, Eq. (78)] The central dictionary hinges on the regularized replacement (JL+S1)[(JJ-JL)κs-J5]-S1² for L·S1. This expression is introduced by assertion and is only checked in the two limits L≫S1 and S1≫L≫S2; it is not derived from the action-angle definitions. The regularization adds terms that are formally 2PN, and Section VI explicitly concedes that going to 2PN may show the regularization is not allowed at that order. Since HPN→stp (85) and hence the matching conditions (90) and the dictionary (93)-(96) depend on this replacement, the central claim is conditional on an unproven ansatz. The statement that other regularization options 'seem to yield the same results' is not a derivation. The authors should either derive Eq. (78) systematically from the action-angle geometry or prove that all regularizations consistent with the two required limits produce identical matching coefficients at 1.5PN.
  2. [Section V.C, Eqs. (86)-(91)] The matching conditions do not uniquely determine the proposed integer lattice transformation. The coefficient nΔJ does not appear in Eq. (90) and is set to zero by conjecture, and the determinant condition yields only |ns|=1, with the choice ns=1 made by identifying I5 with s∥. While the physical arguments for these choices are plausible, they are not consequences of the Hamiltonian matching. As a result, the dictionary (93)-(96) is not uniquely established by the derivation presented. A 2PN computation, or an independent geometric derivation of the lattice coefficients, would be needed to fix these integers; absent that, the claims should be framed as a conjectural dictionary rather than a derived one.
  3. [Section V.B, Eqs. (68)-(69) and the text after Eq. (85)] The derivation uses the leading-order fifth action J5, which is piecewise continuous with a branch switch at |L×S1|=|L×S2|. In taking the S1≫L≫S2 limit the authors state that the branch |L×S2|>|L×S1| is ignored. This branch choice affects the identification of I5 and the subsequent matching conditions. The paper should justify quantitatively that the discarded branch is measure-zero or otherwise cannot change the lattice dictionary; as written, this is an unquantified assumption in a load-bearing step.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section V.B, Eq. (79)] The regularization correction shown in Eq. (79) contains S1σ1κs(JJ-JL)-S1², while Eq. (78) also involves J5. Please state explicitly how the J5-dependent term drops out or is absorbed in the regularization correction.
  2. [Section V.C, text after Eq. (90)] The notation s∥ is used both for the spin-vector projection appearing in the Kerr action-angle formalism and for the quantity defined as s∥ = sµlµ/√(lνlν). Please clarify whether these are the same object and avoid possible confusion with the spin magnitude s.
  3. [Appendix B.4, Eq. (B25)] The correction δλ̇ to the Carter-Mino time is described as found 'empirically'. In an otherwise analytic derivation, it would be preferable to mark this as a conjecture or provide a derivation, since the Mino-time frequency formulas (B19)-(B23) rely on it.
  4. [Section V.D, paragraph after Eq. (96)] The statement that Eqs. (93)-(96) 'should apply to dynamics at finite mass ratios and higher PN orders' is stronger than the 1.5PN matching derivation supports, particularly in view of the caveat in Section VI about the regularization. I recommend reformulating this as a conjecture to be tested at 2PN or by numerical-relativity comparisons.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The test-particle actions and frequencies are independently derived and benchmarked, but the dictionary's fifth-action relation is fixed by identifying I5 with Jψ+s rather than by the matching equations, so that component of the claimed prediction is built in.

  1. self definitional [Section V.C, paragraph following the matching conditions (90)-(91) and the Ansatz (86)-(89)]
    "The action Jψ = s∥ − s, where s∥ is defined as sµlµ/√lνlν through the spin vector of the particle sµ and a specific orbital angular-momentum vector lµ = Y µν uν, where uµ is the four-velocity and Y µν the Killing-Yano tensor of the Kerr space-time (see ref. [35]). We then see that I5 and s∥ = Jψ + s obviously have the same meaning in the overlapping limits. We thus conclude that ns = 1."

    The matching conditions (90)-(91) admit two discrete integer branches: (nr,nL,ns) = (0,-1,1) or (-1,0,-1). The paper fixes ns = 1 by declaring that I5 and Jψ+s 'obviously have the same meaning,' which is precisely the dictionary relation (96) that the matching is supposed to establish. Once ns = 1 is inserted, the remaining coefficients are forced (nr = 0, nL = -1), and the angle and frequency relations (100)-(104), in particular Ω̃5 = Ωψ + Ωz, follow by construction. Thus the fifth-action entry of the dictionary and its corresponding frequency prediction are inputs (identifications) rather than outputs of the Hamiltonian comparison.

full rationale

The core Section IV derivation of closed-form actions (34)-(41) and frequencies is self-contained: the elliptic-integral reduction is performed in the paper, and the resulting frequencies are verified against independent numerical Fourier computations (Fig. 2 and Appendix B.3) and previous semi-analytical work. That part has no significant circularity. The PN side is taken from prior work by overlapping authors (Tanay et al. [13,34]), but the paper corrects an error in [34] and the present matching claim is not a restatement of those papers; the matching is a new comparison against the independently derived test-particle Hamiltonian. However, the matching itself is partially underdetermined. The conditions (90)-(91) leave discrete freedom in the integer lattice transform, and ns = 1 is fixed by identifying I5 with Jψ+s rather than by the Hamiltonian equality; nΔJ = 0 is explicitly conjectured. Consequently the dictionary entries (95)-(96) and the associated frequency relations (103)-(104) are partly inputs or conjectures, so the predictions for Ω̃ΔJ and Ω̃5 are built in at that level. Separately, the L·S1 regularization (78) is an ad hoc expression formally of 2PN order, and the authors themselves note in Section VI that going to 2PN 'may indicate that the aforementioned regularization is not allowed at that order.' This is a robustness and correctness risk rather than a circular step, but it further limits how strongly the dictionary can be claimed to be established. Overall, the circularity is localized to the fifth-action channel; the bulk of the derivation has independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivations rest on the standard Hamiltonian formalism for spinning particles (Witzany et al.), the Hamilton-Jacobi solution of Ref. [35], elliptic integral identities, and Hadamard regularization. The paper's genuinely ad hoc elements are the 2PN regularization of L·S1 and the piecewise fifth action with its ignored branch, both of which enter the matching and the dictionary. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Integer lattice coefficients n_r, n_L, n_ΔJ, n_s = n_r=0, n_L=-1, n_s=1, n_ΔJ=0 (conjectured)
    Introduced in Eq. (86)-(89) as an Ansatz for relating the two action sets. The matching conditions (90) and |n_s|=1 leave n_ΔJ unconstrained and the sign of n_s unfixed; n_s=1 is chosen by physical identification of I_5 with s∥=J_ψ+s, and n_ΔJ=0 by a geometric argument. These are not fitted to external data but are free choices needed to close the dictionary.
  • Carter-Mino time correction δλ = As in Eq. (B25)
    The deformation of Carter-Mino time for spinning particles was 'found empirically by comparing the numerically evaluated frequencies calculated with different methods' (Appendix B.4). It is an auxiliary result, not used in the main dictionary, but it is a fitted expression.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Pole-dipole (MPD) truncation describes compact objects in Kerr to linear order in spin
    Used throughout Section IV to justify the Hamiltonian (1). Standard in the self-force literature.
  • domain assumption The Hamiltonian formalism of Witzany et al. [21] provides a canonical covering of the spinning-particle phase space via the Marck tetrad
    Section IV.A-B. The actions inherit the tetrad dependence; the paper argues the final actions are gauge invariant via the Poincaré-Cartan form.
  • standard math Hadamard partie finie regularization yields the correct finite parts of divergent action derivatives
    Used in Section IV.F and Appendix B for derivatives of J(1); the results are verified against numerical frequencies in Fig. 2.
  • domain assumption Action variables of the two integrable systems are related by a unimodular integer lattice transform
    Section V.C, Eqs. (86)-(91). Standard for integrable systems [39], but applied here to connect the test-particle and finite-mass-ratio limits, which the paper notes do not commute (Section V.B).
  • ad hoc to paper The regularized expression (JL + S1)[(JJ - JL)κs - J5] - S1^2 reproduces L·S1 in both L≫S1 and S1≫L≫S2 limits
    Eq. (78). This is a formal 2PN regularization whose validity at 2PN is questioned by the authors in Section VI. It is load-bearing for the matching conditions.
  • ad hoc to paper The leading-order fifth action J5 is piecewise continuous and the branch |L×S2| > |L×S1| can be ignored in the test-particle limit
    Eqs. (68)-(69) and the text after Eq. (85). The edge case is excluded, which is a selection of parameter space.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Actions of spinning compact binaries: Spinning particle in Kerr matched to dynamics at 1.5 post-Newtonian order." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2K7AKL2O

@misc{pith2026241109742,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Actions of spinning compact binaries: Spinning particle in Kerr matched to dynamics at 1.5 post-Newtonian order},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2K7AKL2O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.09742}
}
read the original abstract

The motion of compact binaries is influenced by the spin of their components starting at the 1.5 post-Newtonian (PN) order. On the other hand, in the large mass ratio limit, the spin of the lighter object appears in the equations of motion at first order in the mass ratio, coinciding with the leading gravitational self-force. Frame and gauge choices make it challenging to compare between the two limits, especially for generic spin configurations. We derive novel closed formulas for the gauge-invariant actions and frequencies for the motion of spinning test particles near Kerr black holes. We use this to express the Hamiltonian perturbatively in terms of action variables up to 3PN and compare it with the 1.5 PN action-angle Hamiltonian at finite mass ratios. This allows us to match the actions across both systems, providing a new gauge-invariant dictionary for interpolation between the two limits.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.09742 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Top row: The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Difference between the frequencies calculated using the an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Post-adiabatic dynamics and waveform generation in self-force theory: an invariant pseudo-Hamiltonian framework

    gr-qc 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A pseudo-Hamiltonian reformulation of 1PA self-force dynamics yields local, invariant action-angle evolution equations and an embedded conservative Hamiltonian whose on-shell energy equals the first-law binding energy.

  2. Analytic Solution for the Motion of Spinning Particles in Kerr Space-Time

    gr-qc 2024-11 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    A small worldline shift, built from the hidden symmetry of Kerr spacetime, separates the linear-in-spin equations of motion and yields a closed-form analytic trajectory.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    (28), we put the inte- grand into standard Legendre forms as follows

    Radial geodesic action Starting with the J(0) r integral in eq. (28), we put the inte- grand into standard Legendre forms as follows. Transform to a new variable ρ, ρ2 ≡ (r − r2)(r1 − r3) (r1 − r2)(r − r3) , r = r3(r1 − r2)ρ2 − r2(r1 − r3) (r1 − r2)ρ2 − (r1 − r3) . (A1) Note that when integrating the radial equation in closed form [54, 64], this ρ coordin...

  2. [2]

    Radial spin correction We use the same transformation to ρ as in Eq. (A1) to ob- tain 1p R(r) √Kso Eso(r2 + a2) − aLso Kso + r2 dr = 2√Ksop 1 − E2so p (r1 − r3)(r2 − r4) Rr(ρ)dρp (1 − ρ2)(1 − k2r ρ2) , (A22) Rr(ρ2) ≡ 1 D (a2Eso − aLso) (r1 − r2)ρ2 − (r1 − r3) 2 + Eso (r1 − r2)r3ρ2 − r2(r1 − r3) 2 , (A23) D ≡ Kso (r1 − r2)ρ2 − (r1 − r3) 2 + (r1 − r2)r3ρ2 −...

  3. [3]

    (41) The K(k), E(k), Π(k) are complete elliptic integrals of the first, second, and third kind

    (39) For the polar part we obtained the much simpler expressions J(0) z = 2a p 1 − E2so π h − 1 − z2 2 z1 K z2 z1 + z1E z2 z1 + (1 − z2 2)(1 − z2 1) z1 Π z2 2, z2 z1 i , (40) J(1) z = 2s∥ π 1 az1 √Kso p 1 − E2so × h (Eso(Kso − a2) +aLso)Π a2z2 2 Kso , z2 z1 − EsoKso K z2 z1 i . (41) The K(k), E(k), Π(k) are complete elliptic integrals of the first, second...

  4. [4]

    so” and “c

    Polar spin correction Transforming to the same coordinate as at geodesic order ζ = z/z−, the J(1) z integrals from Eq. (32) becomes J(1) z = −2s∥ π Z 1 0 √Kso z+ p 1 − E2so 1q (1 − ζ 2)(1 − k2 θ ζ 2) × Lso − aEso(1 − z2 −ζ 2) Kso − a2z2−ζ 2 dζ . (A44) Once more we perform a partial fractions decomposition in terms of ζ 2, Lso − aEso(1 − z2 −ζ 2) Kso − a2z...

  5. [5]

    Poisson and C

    E. Poisson and C. M. Will, Gravity: Newtonian, post- newtonian, relativistic (Cambridge University Press, 2014)

    2014

  6. [6]

    Barack and A

    L. Barack and A. Pound, Self-force and radiation reaction in general relativity, Rept. Prog. Phys. 82, 016904 (2019), arXiv:1805.10385 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    Pound and B

    A. Pound and B. Wardell, Black hole perturbation theory and gravitational self-force, in Handbook of Gravitational Wave Astronomy, edited by C. Bambi, S. Katsanevas, and K. D. Kokkotas (Springer Singapore, Singapore, 2020) pp. 1–119, arXiv:2101.04592 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Polar geodesic action Recall that the polar potential can be factored as Zso(z) =[Kso − (aEso − Lso)2](1 − z2) − z2[a2(1 − E2 so)(1 − z2) +L2 so] =a2(1 − E2 so)(z2 2 − z2)(z2 1 − z2) . (A34) Here ±z2 are the two physical turning points of the polar mo- tion, and ±z1 are two other roots of the quartic, which can be found in terms of a,Eso,z2 by depressing ...

Show all 94 references
  1. [9]

    Afshordi et al

    N. Afshordi et al. (LISA Consortium Waveform Working Group), Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, (2023), arXiv:2311.01300 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    The integrals with C0, C3, C4, C±i √ K, and D±i √ K are regular and no partie finie is needed

    Derivatives of the correction to the radial action First, the radial integrals can be decomposed into partial fractions in r as Z r1 r2 C0 + 4 ∑ i=1 Ci r − ri + C−i √ K r − i √ K + D−i √ K (r − i √ K)2 + Ci √ K r + i √ K + Di √ K (r + i √ K)2 ! drp R(r) , (B1) where Ci, C±i √ ...

  3. [11]

    +r1r2r2 3)(K + r2 4) 2((a2 − K)E − aL)3(K + r2

  4. [12]

    so” subscripts on Rso,Zso and understand it as implicit. Furthermore, we will use the fact that Cc = Cso + O(s,s∥) for C = E,L,K, so we can use the “so

    discussed in our Section IV E. Gonzo & Shi then com- puted actions for scattering orbits and used the boundary-to- bound map of K ¨alin and Porto [73, 74] to obtain a proposal for the actions and fundamental frequencies of bound motion of spinning test particles expressed usin...

  5. [13]

    (B13) Interestingly, all the terms containing elliptic integrals with complex arguments subtract, which makes the final expres- sions manifestly real

    K(kr) ! , (B9c) where Ir 1 = (r2 − r4)E(kr) − (r1 − r4)K(kr) (r1 − r2)(r1 − r4) , (B10) Ir 2 = −(r1 − r3)E(kr) + (r2 − r3)K(kr) (r1 − r2)(r2 − r3) , (B11) Ir 3 = (r2 − r4)E(kr) − (r2 − r3)K(kr) (r2 − r3)(r3 − r4) , (B12) Ir 4 = −(r1 − r3)E(kr) + (r1 − r4)K(kr) (r3 − r4)(r1 − r...

  6. [14]

    (B14) After using the substitution (A38), the terms with C0, C1, CK and DK are regular and can be calculated using standard tech- niques

    Derivatives of the correction to the polar action Similarly to the radial action, we can decompose the inte- grals (57) – (59) into partial fractions with respect to z2 as Z z2 0 dzp Z(z) C0 + C1 z2 − z2 1 + C2 z2 − z2 2 + CK K − a2z2 + DK (K − a2z2)2 . (B14) After using the s...

  7. [15]

    In this approach, the equations of motion are expanded in a Fourier series and solved for the Fourier coefficients as a system of linear equations

    Numerical verification of frequencies To verify the analytical formulas for the frequencies, we compared them with the frequencies calculated using the ap- proach described in [59, 60]. In this approach, the equations of motion are expanded in a Fourier series and solved for t...

  8. [16]

    The deformed Carter-Mino time The frequencies with respect to Carter-Mino time d λ = Σ−1dτ can be calculated in the geodesic case by using the Mino-time Hamiltonian Hλ = Σ(Hτ + 1/2). In the expres- sions for the frequencies (44) the derivatives with respect to 8 The linear par...

  9. [17]

    Radial part Using the variables introduced in (60) one can easily ex- pand the roots r1,2,3,4 by iterating R(r) =0 as r1 = 1 ε2 (1 + √ 1 − ˜e2)ℓ2 M ˜e − 1 ε a(1 + √ 1 − ˜e2)Y ℓ M(1 − ˜e2 + √ 1 − ˜e2) + M[(10 − ˜e2) √ 1 − ˜e2 − 6(1 − ˜e2)] 8(1 − ˜e2) + a2(1 − ˜e2(1 +Y 2)) 2(1 −...

  10. [18]

    Polar part The roots of Z(z) = 0 have a simple form non- perturbatively since Z can be viewed as a quadratic polyno- mial in z2. They can be directly expanded as z2 1 = (1 −Y 2) +ε 2aY3 ℓ − ε2 a2Y 2(1 + 4Y 2) ℓ2 + ε3 aY3[(a2(4 + 8Y 2)) − M2 ˜e2] ℓ3 + O(ε4) , (C8) z2 2 = 1 ε4 ℓ...

  11. [19]

    Lorentz and J

    H. Lorentz and J. Droste, The motion of a system of bodies under the influence of their mutual attraction, according to ein- stein’s theory, in Collected Papers: Volume V (Springer, 1937) pp. 330–355

    1937

  12. [20]

    Einstein, L

    A. Einstein, L. Infeld, and B. Hoffmann, The Gravitational equations and the problem of motion, Annals Math. 39, 65 (1938)

    1938

  13. [21]

    Damour, The problem of motion in Newtonian and Ein- steinian gravity., in Three Hundred Years of Gravitation, edited by S

    T. Damour, The problem of motion in Newtonian and Ein- steinian gravity., in Three Hundred Years of Gravitation, edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel (1987) pp. 128–198

    1987

  14. [22]

    Blanchet, Gravitational Radiation from Post-Newtonian Sources and Inspiralling Compact Binaries, Living Rev

    L. Blanchet, Gravitational Radiation from Post-Newtonian Sources and Inspiralling Compact Binaries, Living Rev. Rel. 17, 2 (2014), arXiv:1310.1528 [gr-qc]

    2014 arXiv

  15. [23]

    L. F. O. Costa and J. Nat ´ario, Center of mass, spin supplemen- tary conditions, and the momentum of spinning particles, Fund. Theor. Phys. 179, 215 (2015), arXiv:1410.6443 [gr-qc]

    2015 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Lovelace, R

    G. Lovelace, R. Owen, H. P. Pfeiffer, and T. Chu, Binary-black- hole initial data with nearly-extremal spins, Phys. Rev. D 78, 084017 (2008), arXiv:0805.4192 [gr-qc]

    2008 arXiv

  17. [25]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro, Numerical relativity: solv- ing Einstein’s equations on the computer (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2010). 22 Witzany et al.: Actions for spinning compact binaries List of references

    2010

  18. [26]

    Steinhoff, Spin gauge symmetry in the action principle for classical relativistic particles, (2015), arXiv:1501.04951 [gr- qc]

    J. Steinhoff, Spin gauge symmetry in the action principle for classical relativistic particles, (2015), arXiv:1501.04951 [gr- qc]

    2015 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Damour, Coalescence of two spinning black holes: an ef- fective one-body approach, Phys

    T. Damour, Coalescence of two spinning black holes: an ef- fective one-body approach, Phys. Rev. D 64, 124013 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0103018

    2001 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Sch ¨afer, Gravitomagnetism in physics and astrophysics, Space science reviews 148, 37 (2009)

    G. Sch ¨afer, Gravitomagnetism in physics and astrophysics, Space science reviews 148, 37 (2009)

    2009

  21. [29]

    Damour and G

    T. Damour and G. Schaefer, Higher Order Relativistic Perias- tron Advances and Binary Pulsars, Nuovo Cim. B 101, 127 (1988)

    1988

  22. [30]

    Tanay, L

    S. Tanay, L. C. Stein, and J. T. G ´alvez Ghersi, Integra- bility of eccentric, spinning black hole binaries up to sec- ond post-Newtonian order, Phys. Rev. D 103, 064066 (2021), arXiv:2012.06586 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    van de Meent and H

    M. van de Meent and H. P. Pfeiffer, Intermediate mass- ratio black hole binaries: Applicability of small mass-ratio perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 181101 (2020), arXiv:2006.12036 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Damour, Gravitational scattering, post-Minkowskian approx- imation and Effective One-Body theory, Phys

    T. Damour, Gravitational scattering, post-Minkowskian approx- imation and Effective One-Body theory, Phys. Rev. D 94, 104015 (2016), arXiv:1609.00354 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Le Tiec, A

    A. Le Tiec, A. H. Mroue, L. Barack, A. Buonanno, H. P. Pfeiffer, N. Sago, and A. Taracchini, Periastron Advance in Black Hole Binaries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 141101 (2011), arXiv:1106.3278 [gr-qc]

    2011 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Effec- tive one body

    the formula for the “fifth” action was derived, denoted as J5. In Tanay et al. [34] the formula for J5 was derived non- perturbatively, treating the 1.5PN Hamiltonian dynamics as an exact system. We revisited this work and found that when truncating J5 at leading PN order yiel...

  27. [35]

    Pound, B

    A. Pound, B. Wardell, N. Warburton, and J. Miller, Second- Order Self-Force Calculation of Gravitational Binding Energy in Compact Binaries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 021101 (2020), arXiv:1908.07419 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    topological

    and the monograph of Arnold et al. [37]). To define them, we use the Poincar ´e-Cartan form ∑q πqdq where q = t, φ ,r,z, ψ are the canonical coordinates. Next, we take hyper- surfaces of constant Eso,Lso,Kso,s∥ and express πq as a func- tion of t, φ ,r,z, ψ on these hypersurfa...

  29. [37]

    Warburton, A

    N. Warburton, A. Pound, B. Wardell, J. Miller, and L. Durkan, Gravitational-Wave Energy Flux for Compact Binaries through Second Order in the Mass Ratio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 151102 (2021), arXiv:2107.01298 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Wardell, A

    B. Wardell, A. Pound, N. Warburton, J. Miller, L. Durkan, and A. Le Tiec, Gravitational Waveforms for Compact Binaries from Second-Order Self-Force Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 241402 (2023), arXiv:2112.12265 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Steinhoff, Canonical formulation of spin in general relativity, Annalen Phys

    J. Steinhoff, Canonical formulation of spin in general relativity, Annalen Phys. 523, 296 (2011), arXiv:1106.4203 [gr-qc]

    2011 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Witzany, J

    V . Witzany, J. Steinhoff, and G. Lukes-Gerakopoulos, Hamil- tonians and canonical coordinates for spinning particles in curved space-time, Class. Quant. Grav. 36, 075003 (2019), arXiv:1808.06582 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  33. [41]

    G. N. Fleming, Covariant Position Operators, Spin, and Local- ity, Physical Review 137, 188 (1965)

    1965

  34. [42]

    R. Owen, A. S. Fox, J. A. Freiberg, and T. P. Jacques, Black Hole Spin Axis in Numerical Relativity, Phys. Rev. D 99, 084031 (2019), arXiv:1708.07325 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Mathisson, Neue mechanik materieller systemes, Acta Phys

    M. Mathisson, Neue mechanik materieller systemes, Acta Phys. Polon. 6, 163 (1937)

    1937

  36. [44]

    Costa, C

    F. Costa, C. A. R. Herdeiro, J. Natario, and M. Zilhao, Mathisson’s helical motions for a spinning particle: Are they unphysical?, Phys. Rev. D85, 024001 (2012), arXiv:1109.1019 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  37. [45]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. Abbott, S. Abraham, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, V . Adya, C. Affeldt, M. Agathos, et al., Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave tran- sients with advanced ligo, advanced virgo and kagra, Living reviews in relativity 23, 1 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    Reitze et al

    D. Reitze et al. , Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO, Bull. Am. As- tron. Soc. 51, 035 (2019), arXiv:1907.04833 [astro-ph.IM]

    2019 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Punturo et al., The Einstein Telescope: A third-generation gravitational wave observatory, Class

    M. Punturo et al., The Einstein Telescope: A third-generation gravitational wave observatory, Class. Quant. Grav.27, 194002 (2010)

    2010

  40. [48]

    Luo et al

    J. Luo et al. (TianQin), TianQin: a space-borne gravita- tional wave detector, Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 035010 (2016), arXiv:1512.02076 [astro-ph.IM]

    2016 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Amaro-Seoane et al

    P. Amaro-Seoane et al. (LISA), Laser Interferometer Space An- tenna, (2017), arXiv:1702.00786 [astro-ph.IM]

    2017 arXiv

  42. [50]

    A. Jan, D. Ferguson, J. Lange, D. Shoemaker, and A. Zim- merman, Accuracy limitations of existing numerical relativ- ity waveforms on the data analysis of current and future ground-based detectors, Phys. Rev. D 110, 024023 (2024), arXiv:2312.10241 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Tanay, G

    S. Tanay, G. Cho, and L. C. Stein, Action-angle variables of a binary black hole with arbitrary eccentricity, spins, and masses at 1.5 post-Newtonian order, Phys. Rev. D107, 103040 (2023), arXiv:2110.15351 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Witzany, Hamilton-Jacobi equation for spinning parti- cles near black holes, Phys

    V . Witzany, Hamilton-Jacobi equation for spinning parti- cles near black holes, Phys. Rev. D 100, 104030 (2019), arXiv:1903.03651 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [53]

    V . I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics , Graduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer, 1989)

    1989

  46. [54]

    V . I. Arnold, V . V . Kozlov, A. I. Neishtadt, and I. Iacob,Math- ematical aspects of classical and celestial mechanics , V ol. 3 (Springer, 2006)

    2006

  47. [55]

    used an alternative method for the computation while us- ing a semi-analytical evaluation of the frequencies through the Hamilton-Jacobi formalism of Ref. [35]. We verified that our fully closed-form expressions for the frequencies de- rived here agree with the results of thes...

  48. [56]

    Schmidt, Celestial mechanics in Kerr space-time, Class

    W. Schmidt, Celestial mechanics in Kerr space-time, Class. Quant. Grav. 19, 2743 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0202090

    2002 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Fasano and S

    A. Fasano and S. Marmi, Analytical mechanics: an introduction (Oxford University Press, 2006)

    2006

  50. [58]

    Buonanno and T

    A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 59, 084006 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9811091

    1999 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Buonanno and T

    A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Transition from inspiral to plunge in binary black hole coalescences, Phys. Rev. D 62, 064015 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0001013

    2000 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Barausse and A

    E. Barausse and A. Buonanno, An Improved effective-one-body Hamiltonian for spinning black-hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D 81, 084024 (2010), arXiv:0912.3517 [gr-qc]

    2010 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Papapetrou, Spinning test particles in general relativity

    A. Papapetrou, Spinning test particles in general relativity. 1., Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 209, 248 (1951)

    1951

  54. [62]

    W. G. Dixon, Dynamics of extended bodies in general relativity. I. Momentum and angular momentum, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A314, 499 (1970)

    1970

  55. [63]

    W. G. Dixon, Dynamics of extended bodies in general relativity. II. Moments of the charge-current vector, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A319, 509 (1970)

    1970

  56. [64]

    W. G. Dixon, Dynamics of Extended Bodies in General Rela- tivity. III. Equations of Motion, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A 277, 59 (1974)

    1974

  57. [65]

    P. D. D’Eath, Dynamics of a small black hole in a background universe, Phys. Rev. D11, 1387 (1975)

    1975

  58. [66]

    K. S. Thorne and J. B. Hartle, Laws of motion and precession for black holes and other bodies, Phys. Rev. D31, 1815 (1984)

    1984

  59. [67]

    Steinhoff and D

    J. Steinhoff and D. Puetzfeld, Influence of internal structure on the motion of test bodies in extreme mass ratio situations, Phys. Rev. D 86, 044033 (2012), arXiv:1205.3926 [gr-qc]. 23 Witzany et al.: Actions for spinning compact binaries List of references

    2012 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Tulczyjew, Motion of multipole particles in general relativ- ity theory, Acta Phys

    W. Tulczyjew, Motion of multipole particles in general relativ- ity theory, Acta Phys. Pol 18, 94 (1959)

    1959

  61. [69]

    Carter, Global structure of the Kerr family of gravitational fields, Phys

    B. Carter, Global structure of the Kerr family of gravitational fields, Phys. Rev. 174, 1559 (1968)

    1968

  62. [70]

    Marck, Solution to the equations of parallel transport in kerr geometry; tidal tensor, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London

    J.-A. Marck, Solution to the equations of parallel transport in kerr geometry; tidal tensor, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 385, 431 (1983)

    1983

  63. [71]

    van de Meent, Analytic solutions for parallel transport along generic bound geodesics in Kerr spacetime, Class

    M. van de Meent, Analytic solutions for parallel transport along generic bound geodesics in Kerr spacetime, Class. Quant. Grav. 37, 145007 (2020), arXiv:1906.05090 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  64. [72]

    G. A. Piovano, C. Pantelidou, J. Mac Uilliam, and V . Witzany, Spinning particles near Kerr black holes: Orbits and gravitational-wave fluxes through the Hamilton-Jacobi formal- ism, (2024), arXiv:2410.05769 [gr-qc]

    2024

  65. [73]

    Warburton, B

    N. Warburton, B. Wardell, O. Long, S. Upton, P. Lynch, Z. Nasipak, and L. C. Stein, KerrGeodesics 0.9.0 (2023)

    2023

  66. [74]

    R ¨udiger, Conserved quantities of spinning test particles in general relativity

    R. R ¨udiger, Conserved quantities of spinning test particles in general relativity. ii, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Lon- don. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 385, 229 (1983)

    1983

  67. [75]

    R ¨udiger, Conserved quantities of spinning test particles in general relativity

    R. R ¨udiger, Conserved quantities of spinning test particles in general relativity. i, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Lon- don. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 375, 185 (1981)

    1981

  68. [76]

    L. V . Drummond and S. A. Hughes, Precisely computing bound orbits of spinning bodies around black holes. II. Generic orbits, Phys. Rev. D 105, 124041 (2022), arXiv:2201.13335 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  69. [77]

    L. V . Drummond and S. A. Hughes, Precisely computing bound orbits of spinning bodies around black holes. I. General frame- work and results for nearly equatorial orbits, Phys. Rev. D 105, 124040 (2022), arXiv:2201.13334 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  70. [78]

    P. F. Byrd and M. D. Friedman, Handbook of elliptic integrals for engineers and physicists, V ol. 67 (Springer, 2013)

    2013

  71. [79]

    DLMF, NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions , http://dlmf.nist.gov/, Release 1.1.5 of 2022-03-15, f. W. J. Olver, A. B. Olde Daalhuis, D. W. Lozier, B. I. Schnei- der, R. F. Boisvert, C. W. Clark, B. R. Miller, B. V . Saunders, H. S. Cohl, and M. A. McClain, eds

    2022

  72. [80]

    Skoupy, G

    V . Skoupy, G. Lukes-Gerakopoulos, L. V . Drummond, and S. A. Hughes, Asymptotic gravitational-wave fluxes from a spinning test body on generic orbits around a Kerr black hole, Phys. Rev. D 108, 044041 (2023), arXiv:2303.16798 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Fujita and W

    R. Fujita and W. Hikida, Analytical solutions of bound time- like geodesic orbits in Kerr spacetime, Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 135002 (2009), arXiv:0906.1420 [gr-qc]

    2009 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Schmidt, M

    P. Schmidt, M. Hannam, S. Husa, and P. Ajith, Tracking the pre- cession of compact binaries from their gravitational-wave sig- nal, Phys. Rev. D 84, 024046 (2011), arXiv:1012.2879 [gr-qc]

    2011 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Schmidt, M

    P. Schmidt, M. Hannam, and S. Husa, Towards models of grav- itational waveforms from generic binaries: A simple approxi- mate mapping between precessing and non-precessing inspiral signals, Phys. Rev. D 86, 104063 (2012), arXiv:1207.3088 [gr- qc]

    2012 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Samanta, S

    R. Samanta, S. Tanay, and L. C. Stein, Closed-form solutions of spinning, eccentric binary black holes at 1.5 post-Newtonian order, Phys. Rev. D108, 124039 (2023), arXiv:2210.01605 [gr- qc]

    2023 arXiv

  77. [85]

    F. M. Blanco and E. E. Flanagan, Particle Motion under the Conservative Piece of the Self-Force is Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 051201 (2023), arXiv:2205.01667 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  78. [86]

    F. M. Blanco and E. E. Flanagan, Motion of a spinning particle under the conservative piece of the self-force is Hamiltonian to first order in mass and spin, Phys. Rev. D 107, 124017 (2023), arXiv:2302.10233 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Drasco and S

    S. Drasco and S. A. Hughes, Rotating black hole orbit function- als in the frequency domain, Phys. Rev. D 69, 044015 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0308479

    2004 arXiv

  80. [88]

    A. M. Grant, Flux-balance laws for spinning bodies under the gravitational self-force, (2024), arXiv:2406.10343 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Gonzo and C

    R. Gonzo and C. Shi, Scattering and bound observables for spinning particles in Kerr spacetime with generic spin orien- tations, (2024), arXiv:2405.09687v2 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  82. [90]

    K ¨alin and R

    G. K ¨alin and R. A. Porto, From Boundary Data to Bound States, JHEP 01, 072, arXiv:1910.03008 [hep-th]

    1910 arXiv

  83. [91]

    K ¨alin and R

    G. K ¨alin and R. A. Porto, From boundary data to bound states. Part II. Scattering angle to dynamical invariants (with twist), JHEP 02, 120, arXiv:1911.09130 [hep-th]

    1911 arXiv

  84. [92]

    L. C. Stein and N. Warburton, Location of the last stable orbit in Kerr spacetime, Phys. Rev. D 101, 064007 (2020), arXiv:1912.07609 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Comp `ere, Y

    G. Comp `ere, Y . Liu, and J. Long, Classification of radial Kerr geodesic motion, Phys. Rev. D 105, 024075 (2022), arXiv:2106.03141 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Wolfram Research, Elliptic integrals on The Mathemat- ical Functions Site, functions.wolfram.com/EllipticIntegrals (2024). 24

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.