pith. sign in

arxiv: 2411.10590 · v2 · submitted 2024-11-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.GA

McFACTS II: Mass Ratio--Effective Spin Relationship of Black Hole Mergers in the AGN Channel

Harrison E. Cook , Barry McKernan , K.E. Saavik Ford , Vera Delfavero , Kaila Nathaniel , Jake Postiglione , Shawn Ray , Emily J. McPike
show 1 more author
Richard O'Shaughnessy
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 16:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA
keywords black hole mergersAGN disksgravitational wavesmass ratioeffective spinMonte Carlo simulationsprograde orbitsdisk lifetime
0
0 comments X

The pith

Dense moderately short-lived AGN disks with a steep black hole mass function produce the observed anti-correlation in mass ratio and effective spin for mergers.

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

The paper runs Monte Carlo simulations of black hole binary formation and mergers inside active galactic nucleus disks, varying the initial mass function, disk properties, and orbital directions. It identifies that dense disks with moderate lifetimes, a black hole mass function proportional to mass to the power of negative two, and over ninety percent prograde orbits best reproduce the anti-correlation between mass ratio and effective spin seen in gravitational wave data. A sympathetic reader would care because this helps determine whether the AGN channel can explain a significant fraction of observed black hole mergers and what conditions are required. If correct, it narrows the viable parameter space for AGN disk models in producing compact object binaries.

Core claim

Using the McFACTS Monte Carlo code, varying the black hole initial mass function, disk model, size, lifetime and prograde-to-retrograde fraction shows that dense, moderately short-lived AGN disks are preferred for producing a (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation like those identified from existing gravitational wave observations, with a BH initial mass function proportional to M to the minus two also preferred over a top-heavy one, and a prograde-to-retrograde fraction greater than ninety percent required for consistency with observations.

What carries the argument

Monte Carlo simulations of migration, binary formation, spin evolution and merger processes inside AGN disks, testing different initial conditions and disk parameters.

If this is right

  • Dense AGN disks with moderate lifetimes match the observed (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation better than other configurations.
  • A black hole initial mass function scaling as M^{-2} is favored over M^{-1}.
  • Greater than 90% of newly formed black hole binaries must be prograde to match data.
  • The AGN channel can produce results consistent with LVK observations under these preferred conditions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the anti-correlation persists or strengthens in future larger gravitational wave catalogs, it would increase the inferred contribution from the AGN channel.
  • Altering the assumed gas dynamics or stellar interaction rules in the simulations could shift the preferred disk lifetime or mass function.
  • The results connect the nuclear star cluster environment around supermassive black holes directly to observable spin and mass distributions in mergers.

Load-bearing premise

The McFACTS Monte Carlo code accurately captures the dominant physical processes of migration, binary formation, spin evolution, and merger inside AGN disks without major omissions or incorrect prescriptions.

What would settle it

A large sample of gravitational wave events showing no anti-correlation between mass ratio and effective spin, or a different preferred mass function, would falsify the claim that these AGN disk parameters are required.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10590 by Barry McKernan, Emily J. McPike, Harrison E. Cook, Jake Postiglione, Kaila Nathaniel, K.E. Saavik Ford, Richard O'Shaughnessy, Shawn Ray, Vera Delfavero.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Mass ratio (q) distribution as a function of χeff . Top left: results from our default setup for a Sirko & Goodman (2003) disk with BH mass distribution power-law index γ = 2, run sg default. Gold points represent 1g-1g mergers (see text). Inverted purple triangles indicate either 2g-1g or 2g-2g mergers. Red triangles indicate ≥3g-Ng mergers. The solid and dashed lines are fit through (χeff , q) = (0, 1) a… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Final mass of merger remnants versus radius (left column) and time (right column) in SG disks (top row) and TQM disks (bottom row). Strong migration torques and traps in SG disks near 103 Rg accelerate hierarchical mergers whereas weaker torques in the TQM disk cause traps to be less important leading to a maximum of 3g remnants and lower masses. SG disks take ∼ 0.2 Myr to regularly produce 1g mergers with… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Primary Mass vs. χeff . Hierarchical mergers drive primary masses higher and produce mergers with larger values of χeff . Markers are as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Varying the disk lifetime. Top row: SG disk setups with τAGN = [0.25, 0.5, 0.75] Myr. Bottom row: TQM disk setups with τAGN = 2.5, 3, and 5 Myr. The anti-correlation steepens with lifetime in dense SG disks as more hierarchical mergers with large χeff occur, but τAGN has little impact on low density TQM disks. Markers are as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Merger remnant mass versus disk lifetime. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Varying disk radius. SG and TQM disks with radii r = (2 × 104 , 5 × 104 , 105 ) Rg. Both decreases and increases in disk radius result in fewer mergers. Model name left-to-right, top-to-bottom: sg r2e4, sg default, sg r7e4, tqm r2e4, tqm default, and tqm r7e4. Markers are as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Merger remnant mass versus radius. Left column shows outer disk radii set to 2 × 104 Rg compared to the default 5 × 104 Rg in the center column, and 7 × 104 Rg in the right column. SG disks produces less mergers with both changes for SG (top row). Shrinking a TQM (bottom row) disk also produces less mergers, but extending this disk includes more of the optically thick outskirts that drives migration in thi… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Varying the width of the Gaussian distribution for initial BH spin magnitudes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Varying the retrograde BBH fraction. Left column: Default SG and TQM disk setups where no retrograde BBH form (fret = 0, sg default). Center column: Retrograde fraction is fret = 0.1 (sg fr0p1). Right column: Half of BBH are retrograde (fret = 0.5) (sg fr0p5). Increasing allowed retrograde fraction splits the hierarchical population to negative χeff and flattens the slopes of the anti-correlation for SG-li… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Varying the initial maximum orbital eccentricity. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Thermal Population with varying lifetimes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Varying the initial maximum orbital eccentricity. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Initially circular orbits with varying AGN lifetimes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We use the Monte Carlo For AGN (active galactic nucleus) Channel Testing and Simulation (McFACTS, https://www.github.com/mcfacts/mcfacts) code to study the effect of AGN disk and nuclear star cluster parameters on predicted mass distributions for LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA (LVK) compact binaries forming in AGN disks. The assumptions we vary include the black hole (BH) initial mass function, disk model, disk size, disk lifetime, and the prograde-to-retrograde fraction of newly formed black hole binaries. Broadly we find that dense, moderately short-lived AGN disks are preferred for producing a $(q,\chi_{\rm eff})$ anti-correlation like those identified from existing gravitational wave (GW) observations. Additionally, a BH initial mass function (MF $\propto M^{-2}$) is preferred over a more top-heavy MF ($M^{-1}$). The preferred fraction of prograde-to-retrograde is $>90\%$, to produce results consistent with observations.

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 paper uses the McFACTS Monte Carlo code to explore the effects of varying AGN disk and nuclear star cluster parameters—including the black hole initial mass function (IMF), disk model, disk size, disk lifetime, and prograde-to-retrograde fraction—on the predicted mass-ratio (q) and effective spin (χ_eff) distributions of black hole mergers formed in AGN disks. By comparing simulated populations to the (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation reported in existing LVK gravitational-wave observations, the authors identify preferred parameter combinations: dense and moderately short-lived disks, an IMF ∝ M^{-2} (rather than a top-heavy M^{-1}), and a prograde fraction exceeding 90%.

Significance. If the McFACTS sub-grid prescriptions for migration, binary formation, and spin evolution prove accurate, the parameter study would map AGN disk properties onto an observable GW signature, offering a route to constrain the contribution of the AGN channel and the properties of nuclear star clusters. The explicit variation of free parameters and the focus on a specific observable correlation constitute a concrete, falsifiable exploration within the AGN formation scenario.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and parameter-variation description: the quoted 'preferred' values for disk lifetime, density, IMF power-law index, and prograde-to-retrograde fraction are obtained by selecting the combinations that reproduce the observed (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation. This selection is performed on the same data the model is intended to explain, rendering the preferences fits rather than blind predictions and weakening the claim that these values are physically required.
  2. [Methods (McFACTS implementation)] Methods section describing the McFACTS implementation: no direct validation is shown for the sub-grid models of gas-driven migration rates, binary capture, or spin alignment/accretion against analytic limits, hydrodynamical benchmarks, or independent observables. Because the central claim rests on the fidelity of these prescriptions (particularly any mass-ratio dependence or prograde/retrograde spin evolution), the absence of such tests makes the reported parameter preferences vulnerable to systematic artifacts in the Monte Carlo code.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a brief quantitative statement of how the anti-correlation is measured (e.g., slope or correlation coefficient) and the precise ranges explored for each varied parameter.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate where revisions will be made to the next version.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and parameter-variation description: the quoted 'preferred' values for disk lifetime, density, IMF power-law index, and prograde-to-retrograde fraction are obtained by selecting the combinations that reproduce the observed (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation. This selection is performed on the same data the model is intended to explain, rendering the preferences fits rather than blind predictions and weakening the claim that these values are physically required.

    Authors: We agree that the parameter combinations identified as 'preferred' are those that reproduce the observed anti-correlation and therefore constitute fits to the LVK data rather than blind predictions. The manuscript's objective is to determine which AGN-disk and nuclear-cluster parameters are capable of producing a (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation consistent with existing observations. We will revise the abstract and the relevant discussion sections to make this distinction explicit and to avoid any implication that the values are uniquely required on physical grounds independent of the data. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods (McFACTS implementation)] Methods section describing the McFACTS implementation: no direct validation is shown for the sub-grid models of gas-driven migration rates, binary capture, or spin alignment/accretion against analytic limits, hydrodynamical benchmarks, or independent observables. Because the central claim rests on the fidelity of these prescriptions (particularly any mass-ratio dependence or prograde/retrograde spin evolution), the absence of such tests makes the reported parameter preferences vulnerable to systematic artifacts in the Monte Carlo code.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript does not present new, direct comparisons of the sub-grid prescriptions against analytic limits or hydrodynamical simulations. The migration, capture, and spin-evolution modules in McFACTS are based on models previously published in the literature; the code repository and the McFACTS I paper provide the relevant references and implementation details. We will add a concise subsection to the methods that summarizes the provenance of these prescriptions, cites existing validation studies where available, and explicitly notes the limitations of the current implementation. New benchmark calculations against hydrodynamical simulations lie outside the scope of this parameter-exploration study. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: parameter survey matches external observations without reduction to inputs.

full rationale

The paper conducts a Monte Carlo exploration varying AGN disk parameters, BH mass function, and prograde fraction, then reports which combinations reproduce the observed (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation. This constitutes a standard forward-model comparison to independent GW data rather than any self-definitional loop, fitted input relabeled as prediction, or load-bearing self-citation. No equations or claims in the abstract reduce the output to the varied inputs by construction; the central result is the identification of matching parameter sets, which remains falsifiable against future observations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the McFACTS simulation framework and on the assumption that the observed anti-correlation is astrophysical rather than instrumental. Multiple simulation inputs are adjusted to match data.

free parameters (4)
  • prograde-to-retrograde fraction = >90%
    Varied and selected to be >90% to reproduce the observed anti-correlation
  • BH initial mass function power-law index = -2
    Varied between -1 and -2; -2 selected as preferred
  • AGN disk lifetime = moderately short-lived
    Varied and selected as 'moderately short-lived' for consistency with data
  • AGN disk density/size = dense
    Varied and selected as 'dense' to produce the desired correlation
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The McFACTS Monte Carlo code correctly models black-hole migration, binary formation, and spin evolution inside AGN disks.
    All reported results depend on this modeling assumption.
  • domain assumption The (q, χ_eff) anti-correlation reported in LVK catalogs is a genuine astrophysical signal rather than a selection or measurement artifact.
    The study aims to reproduce this feature.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5749 in / 1611 out tokens · 66495 ms · 2026-05-23T16:53:49.605124+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. Population Properties of Binary Black Holes with Eccentricity

    astro-ph.HE 2026-02 conditional novelty 8.0

    First joint population inference on binary black hole eccentricity from GWTC-4 bounds the eccentric branching ratio below 5% at 90% confidence, with results consistent with quasi-circular models but highly model-dependent.

  2. How do the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA's Heavy Black Holes Form? No evidence for core-collapse Intermediate-mass black holes in GWTC-4

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    No evidence for core-collapse IMBHs in GWTC-4; heavy BHs from hierarchical mergers, with low-spin mass distribution truncating at ~65 solar masses and PIMG upper edge estimated at 150 solar masses.

  3. How do the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA's Heavy Black Holes Form? No evidence for core-collapse Intermediate-mass black holes in GWTC-4

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    No evidence for core-collapse formed low-spin IMBHs in GWTC-4, with 90% upper limit on merger rate of 0.077 Gpc^{-3} yr^{-1}, low-spin BH mass truncation at 65 solar masses consistent with pair-instability gap lower e...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 84 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

    work page

  3. [3]

    F 0j7 7-qERu P)JI(> ? q 0 K5>kx_0s 7KVO7R zU W9 93 9

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.831784 2021

  4. [4]

    D., Abraham , S., et al

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

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

  5. [5]

    2020 b , , 125, 101102, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.101102

    ---. 2020 b , , 125, 101102, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.101102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.101102 2020

  6. [6]

    2023, Phys

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

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.041039 2023

  7. [7]

    2024, Phys

    ---. 2024, , 109, 022001, 10.1103/PhysRevD.109.022001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.022001 2024

  8. [8]

    Antonini , F., & Rasio , F. A. 2016, , 831, 187, 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/187

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/2/187 2016

  9. [9]

    2023, Universe, 9, 138, 10.3390/universe9030138

    Arca Sedda , M., Naoz , S., & Kocsis , B. 2023, Universe, 9, 138, 10.3390/universe9030138

    work page doi:10.3390/universe9030138 2023

  10. [10]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  11. [11]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  12. [12]

    M., Lim, P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, , 935, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 2022

  13. [13]

    N., & Wolf , R

    Bahcall , J. N., & Wolf , R. A. 1976, , 209, 214, 10.1086/154711

    work page doi:10.1086/154711 1976

  14. [14]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.15112, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.15112

    Banerjee , S., & Olejak , A. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.15112, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.15112

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.15112 2024

  15. [15]

    2017, , 835, 165, 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/165

    Bartos , I., Kocsis , B., Haiman , Z., & M \'a rka , S. 2017, , 835, 165, 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/165

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/165 2017

  16. [16]

    2016, A&A, 594, A97, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628980

    Belczynski , K., Heger , A., Gladysz , W., et al. 2016, , 594, A97, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628980

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628980 2016

  17. [17]

    M., Mac Low , M.-M., McKernan , B., & Ford , K

    Bellovary , J. M., Mac Low , M.-M., McKernan , B., & Ford , K. E. S. 2016, , 819, L17, 10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/L17

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/l17 2016

  18. [18]

    2010, , 523, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014414

    Bitsch , B., & Kley , W. 2010, , 523, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014414

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014414 2010

  19. [19]

    M., Dittmann , A

    Calcino , J., Dempsey , A. M., Dittmann , A. J., & Li , H. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.13727, 10.48550/arXiv.2311.13727

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.13727 2023

  20. [20]

    Callister , T. A. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2104.09508, 10.48550/arXiv.2104.09508

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.09508 2021

  21. [21]

    A., Haster , C.-J., Ng , K

    Callister , T. A., Haster , C.-J., Ng , K. K. Y., Vitale , S., & Farr , W. M. 2021, , 922, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2ccc

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac2ccc 2021

  22. [22]

    S., Chametla , R

    Cornejo , S., Masset , F. S., Chametla , R. O., & Fromenteau , S. 2023, , 522, 678, 10.1093/mnras/stad681

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad681 2023

  23. [23]

    2023, , 523, 1126, 10.1093/mnras/stad1412

    DeLaurentiis , S., Epstein-Martin , M., & Haiman , Z. 2023, , 523, 1126, 10.1093/mnras/stad1412

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1412 2023

  24. [24]

    Delfavero , V., Ford , K. E. S., McKernan , B., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.18815, 10.48550/arXiv.2410.18815

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.18815 2024

  25. [25]

    J., Dempsey , A

    Dittmann , A. J., Dempsey , A. M., & Li , H. 2024, , 964, 61, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad23ce

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad23ce 2024

  26. [26]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08138, 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08138

    Dodici , M., & Tremaine , S. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08138, 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08138

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.08138 2024

  27. [27]

    S., Caban , F., et al

    Fabj , G., Nasim , S. S., Caban , F., et al. 2020, , 499, 2608, 10.1093/mnras/staa3004

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3004 2020

  28. [28]

    Ford , K. E. S., & McKernan , B. 2022, , 517, 5827, 10.1093/mnras/stac2861

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2861 2022

  29. [29]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.08801, 10.48550/arXiv.2506.08801

    ---. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.08801, 10.48550/arXiv.2506.08801

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.08801 2025

  30. [30]

    Fragione , G., Grishin , E., Leigh , N. W. C., Perets , H. B., & Perna , R. 2019, , 488, 47, 10.1093/mnras/stz1651

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1651 2019

  31. [31]

    A., Bonnerot , C., & Gerosa , D

    Gangardt , D., Trani , A. A., Bonnerot , C., & Gerosa , D. 2024, , 530, 3689, 10.1093/mnras/stae1117

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1117 2024

  32. [32]

    C., Metzger , B

    Generozov , A., Stone , N. C., Metzger , B. D., & Ostriker , J. P. 2018, , 478, 4030, 10.1093/mnras/sty1262

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1262 2018

  33. [33]

    C., & Mandel , I

    Gilbaum , S., Grishin , E., Stone , N. C., & Mandel , I. 2025, , 982, L13, 10.3847/2041-8213/adb7dc

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adb7dc 2025

  34. [34]

    Grishin , E., Gilbaum , S., & Stone , N. C. 2024, , 530, 2114, 10.1093/mnras/stae828

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae828 2024

  35. [35]

    M., Jiang , Y.-F., & Armitage , P

    Hankla , A. M., Jiang , Y.-F., & Armitage , P. J. 2020, , 902, 50, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb4df

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb4df 2020

  36. [36]

    R., Millman , K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  37. [37]

    A., & Dosopoulou , F

    Hoang , B.-M., Naoz , S., Kocsis , B., Rasio , F. A., & Dosopoulou , F. 2018, , 856, 140, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaafce

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

  38. [38]

    2012, , 750, 34, 10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/34

    Horn , B., Lyra , W., Mac Low , M.-M., & S \'a ndor , Z. 2012, , 750, 34, 10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/34

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/750/1/34 2012

  39. [39]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  40. [40]

    A., & Masset , F

    Jim \'e nez , M. A., & Masset , F. S. 2017, , 471, 4917, 10.1093/mnras/stx1946

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1946 2017

  41. [41]

    2022, , 517, 1602, 10.1093/mnras/stac2577

    Li , R., & Lai , D. 2022, , 517, 1602, 10.1093/mnras/stac2577

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2577 2022

  42. [42]

    R., Do , T., Ghez , A

    Lu , J. R., Do , T., Ghez , A. M., et al. 2013, , 764, 155, 10.1088/0004-637X/764/2/155

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/764/2/155 2013

  43. [43]

    2010, , 715, L68, 10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/L68

    Lyra , W., Paardekooper , S.-J., & Mac Low , M.-M. 2010, , 715, L68, 10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/L68

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/l68 2010

  44. [44]

    McKernan , B., & Ford , K. E. S. 2024, , 531, 3479, 10.1093/mnras/stae1351

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1351 2024

  45. [45]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., Callister , T., et al. 2022 a , , 514, 3886, 10.1093/mnras/stac1570

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1570 2022

  46. [46]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., Cantiello , M., et al. 2022 b , , 514, 4102, 10.1093/mnras/stac1310

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1310 2022

  47. [47]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., Cook , H. E., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.16515, 10.48550/arXiv.2410.16515

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.16515 2024

  48. [48]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., Kocsis , B., Lyra , W., & Winter , L. M. 2014, , 441, 900, 10.1093/mnras/stu553

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu553 2014

  49. [49]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., Lyra , W., & Perets , H. B. 2012, , 425, 460, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21486.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21486.x 2012

  50. [50]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., & O'Shaughnessy , R. 2020 a , , 498, 4088, 10.1093/mnras/staa2681

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2681 2020

  51. [51]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., O'Shaugnessy , R., & Wysocki , D. 2020 b , , 494, 1203, 10.1093/mnras/staa740

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa740 2020

  52. [52]

    S., Fabj , G., Caban , F., et al

    Nasim , S. S., Fabj , G., Caban , F., et al. 2023, , 522, 5393, 10.1093/mnras/stad1295

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1295 2023

  53. [53]

    2024, , 689, A305, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450480

    Olejak , A., Klencki , J., Xu , X.-T., et al. 2024, , 689, A305, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450480

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450480 2024

  54. [54]

    A General Code for Modeling MHD Flows on Parallel Computers: Versatile Advection Code

    Paardekooper , S. J., Baruteau , C., Crida , A., & Kley , W. 2010, , 401, 1950, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15782.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15782.x 2010

  55. [55]

    Papaloizou , J. C. B., & Larwood , J. D. 2000, , 315, 823, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03466.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03466.x 2000

  56. [56]

    2024, , 962, 143, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1b53

    Qian , K., Li , J., & Lai , D. 2024, , 962, 143, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1b53

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1b53 2024

  57. [57]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.16113, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.16113

    Renzo , M., & Smith , N. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.16113, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.16113

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.16113 2024

  58. [58]

    Reynolds , C. S. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 41, 10.1038/s41550-018-0665-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0665-z 2019

  59. [59]

    L., Amaro-Seoane , P., Chatterjee , S., & Rasio , F

    Rodriguez , C. L., Amaro-Seoane , P., Chatterjee , S., & Rasio , F. A. 2018, , 120, 151101, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.151101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.151101 2018

  60. [60]

    2023, , 524, 2770, 10.1093/mnras/stad1926

    Rowan , C., Boekholt , T., Kocsis , B., & Haiman , Z. 2023, , 524, 2770, 10.1093/mnras/stad1926

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1926 2023

  61. [61]

    J., et al

    Samsing , J., Bartos , I., D'Orazio , D. J., et al. 2022, , 603, 237, 10.1038/s41586-021-04333-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04333-1 2022

  62. [62]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.12998, 10.48550/arXiv.2308.12998

    Santini , A., Gerosa , D., Cotesta , R., & Berti , E. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.12998, 10.48550/arXiv.2308.12998

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.12998 2023

  63. [63]

    Schawinski , K., Koss , M., Berney , S., & Sartori , L. F. 2015, , 451, 2517, 10.1093/mnras/stv1136

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1136 2015

  64. [64]

    2019, , 878, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab20ca

    Secunda , A., Bellovary , J., Mac Low , M.-M., et al. 2019, , 878, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab20ca

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab20ca 2019

  65. [65]

    2021, , 908, L27, 10.3847/2041-8213/abe11d

    Secunda , A., Hernandez , B., Goodman , J., et al. 2021, , 908, L27, 10.3847/2041-8213/abe11d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abe11d 2021

  66. [66]

    2021, , 921, 70, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1ce4

    Shen , Y. 2021, , 921, 70, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1ce4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1ce4 2021

  67. [67]

    R., Vuthela, F

    Sirko , E., & Goodman , J. 2003, , 341, 501, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06431.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06431.x 2003

  68. [68]

    C., Metzger , B

    Stone , N. C., Metzger , B. D., & Haiman , Z. 2017, , 464, 946, 10.1093/mnras/stw2260

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2260 2017

  69. [69]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.16258, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.16258

    Su , Y. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.16258, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.16258

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.16258 2025

  70. [70]

    2022, , 513, 5465, 10.1093/mnras/stac1294

    Sz \"o lgy \'e n , \'A ., MacLeod , M., & Loeb , A. 2022, , 513, 5465, 10.1093/mnras/stac1294

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1294 2022

  71. [71]

    2020 a , , 899, 26, 10.3847/1538-4357/aba2cc

    Tagawa , H., Haiman , Z., Bartos , I., & Kocsis , B. 2020 a , , 899, 26, 10.3847/1538-4357/aba2cc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba2cc 2020

  72. [72]

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

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

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

  73. [73]

    Tanaka , H., & Ward , W. R. 2004, , 602, 388, 10.1086/380992

    work page doi:10.1086/380992 2004

  74. [74]

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

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration , the Virgo Collaboration , & the KAGRA Collaboration . 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08219, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.08219

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.08219 2025

  75. [75]

    A., Quataert , E., & Murray , N

    Thompson , T. A., Quataert , E., & Murray , N. 2005, , 630, 167, 10.1086/431923

    work page doi:10.1086/431923 2005

  76. [76]

    2008, , 78, 081501, 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.081501

    Tichy , W., & Marronetti , P. 2008, , 78, 081501, 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.081501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.78.081501 2008

  77. [77]

    P., Mapelli , M., P \'e rigois , C., et al

    Vaccaro , M. P., Mapelli , M., P \'e rigois , C., et al. 2024, , 685, A51, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348509

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348509 2024

  78. [78]

    Vajpeyi , A., Thrane , E., Smith , R., McKernan , B., & Saavik Ford , K. E. 2022, , 931, 82, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6180

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6180 2022

  79. [79]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  80. [80]

    Volonteri , M., Madau , P., Quataert , E., & Rees , M. J. 2005, , 620, 69, 10.1086/426858

    work page doi:10.1086/426858 2005

Showing first 80 references.