Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

The fate of EMRI-IMRI pairs in AGN accretion disks: hydrodynamic and three body simulations

T0 review · 4 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 A gap-opening intermediate-mass black hole in an AGN accretion disk can drive a stellar-mass black hole inward until the pair either merges as a light IMRI or the small black hole is ejected after a temporary EMRI, producing two…

desk verdict Careful two-stage simulation of sBH-IMBH encounters in AGN disks; the hydro part is solid, but the two-event rate leans on an untested constant-gas-force assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16070 v2 pith:SOUBO32Z submitted 2024-11-25 astro-ph.HE gr-qc

Peng Peng , Alessia Franchini , Matteo Bonetti , Alberto Sesana , Xian Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEgr-qc
keywords extreme-mass-ratioinspiralintermediate-mass-ratioactivegalacticnucleiaccretiondiskintermediate-massblackholestellar-massgravitationalwavessynchronizedmigration
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 aims to show that when a stellar-mass black hole (sBH) and an intermediate-mass black hole (IMBH) share an AGN accretion disk, the IMBH—which carves a gap in the disk—can drag the sBH inward in synchronized migration all the way to about 10 Schwarzschild radii from the central supermassive black hole. Using 3D hydrodynamical simulations, the authors show that this migration is driven by a combination of gaseous torques (a strengthened Type-I torque and the IMBH's interfering density wave) and the IMBH's tidal pull, and that it survives even when the inner part of the disk has been largely accreted. In the final gravitational-wave-dominated phase, a relativistic three-body code shows the sBH is either captured by the IMBH to merge as a 'light IMRI' or kicked out after a temporary EMRI-like phase. Either way, two successive gravitational-wave events are produced, which a planned space-based detector could observe as back-to-back signals encoding how black holes grow inside AGN disks.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on two simulation tools joined in sequence. First, 3D smoothed-particle-hydrodynamics simulations (the PHANTOM code) evolve the disk together with three sink particles—the SMBH, the IMBH, and the sBH—measuring the separate contributions of gaseous and tidal torques to the sBH's migration, with InnerDisk and NoInnerDisk initial conditions bracketing the inner disk's surface density. Second, a post-Newtonian three-body code follows the GW-dominated phase, with a fictitious gaseous drag force calibrated to the hydro runs and assumed to remain constant until the IMBH reaches about 5 Rs, based on a cited disk-squeezing simulation. The dynamical pivot is the Hills-sphere (Jacobi) capture: when the sBH's separation from the IMBH drops below roughly $q^{{1/3}}$ a_IMBH, the two form a chaotic temporary binary, and whether gravitational radiation dissipates enough energy to bind them determines capture versus ejection.

What would settle it

A hydrodynamical simulation that lets the inner disk evolve self-consistently while the IMBH's orbit decays by gravitational waves from about 30 Rs to merger would settle the assumption: if the inner disk surface density at the sBH's location drops substantially before the IMBH reaches roughly 10 Rs, synchronized migration breaks too early, and the back-to-back two-event outcome would not occur. A LISA observation of a single IMRI with no accompanying EMRI-like signal in the preceding few years would not falsify the scenario by itself (the event rate allows such cases), but it would bound the fraction of encounters that end in ejection after a temporary EMRI.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a gap-opening IMBH in an AGN disk forces a nearby sBH to migrate inward at the same rate as the IMBH, and this synchronized migration continues until the pair reaches roughly 10 Schwarzschild radii from the central SMBH, where gravitational-wave emission takes over. At that point, the IMBH's faster GW-driven inspiral catches up with the sBH; when the sBH enters the IMBH's Hills sphere, the outcome is set by how much energy gravitational radiation can dissipate during the chaotic three-body interaction. In about 44% of the 100 simulated phase angles, the sBH–IMBH binary hardens and merges within a few orbits, producing a light IMRI, and the merged remnant then inspirals into the SMBH within about a year, yielding two successive IMRIs. In about 46% of cases the binary is unstable, the sBH is ejected after a transient stage, and a temporary EMRI in the LISA band is followed by the IMBH–SMBH IMRI. The authors conclude that in most encounters two successive GW events are produced, and that the probability of forming a bound sBH–IMBH binary is of order 0.1, consistent with Jacobi capture expectations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the density of the inner disk, and therefore the gas force on the stellar-mass black hole, stays roughly constant through the final gravitational-wave-driven plunge, so that a single fixed gas-force model is enough to capture the disk's effect on the decisive close encounter.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • When the sBH is captured, LISA would detect two successive IMRIs: the sBH–IMBH merger (chirp mass ~10^2 Msun) followed within about three years by the IMBH–SMBH merger (chirp mass ~10^4 Msun).
  • When the sBH is ejected, the sBH first spends roughly a year in the mHz band as a temporary EMRI (orbiting down to ~5 Rs), after which the IMRI of the IMBH into the SMBH follows.
  • Synchronized migration persists even when the inner disk has been largely accreted, provided some gas leaks across the IMBH's gap; in the simulated setup the synchronous equilibrium sits at about 0.78 times the IMBH's orbital radius.
  • Across 100 three-body runs with varying initial phase angles, about 44% end in sBH–IMBH binary formation (two IMRIs), roughly 46% end in ejection with a preceding temporary EMRI, and only about 4% yield a single IMRI.
  • If IMBHs form through hierarchical mergers at migration traps in AGN disks, the rate of successive EMRI/IMRI events would be roughly 1 to 100 per year.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A coupled disk-plus-GW simulation that allows the inner disk density to evolve during the final inspiral would test the constant-force assumption; if the disk drains faster than the single calibrated force model assumes, the two-event rate predicted here would be an upper limit.
  • LISA data searches could be designed to look for correlated pairs—an EMRI-like signal followed within a few years by an IMRI with a chirp mass near 10^4 solar masses—because this scenario predicts most encounters produce two sequential signals rather than one.
  • The chaotic dependence on initial phase angle means individual outcomes are unpredictable, but the roughly 50/50 split between capture and ejection may be a robust statistical feature of dissipative Jacobi capture, worth rechecking for different IMBH masses, gap widths, and disk viscosities.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies the late evolution of a stellar-mass black hole (sBH) orbiting inside a gap-opening intermediate-mass black hole (IMBH) embedded in an AGN accretion disk. The authors first use 3D SPH simulations (PHANTOM) with two disk setups, InnerDisk and NoInnerDisk, to study the co-evolution of the disk and the migration of the sBH. They find that the gaseous torque, together with the tidal torque of the IMBH, accelerates the sBH migration and, in the NoInnerDisk 078 run, drives synchronized migration with the IMBH. They then use a post-Newtonian three-body code, augmented with a fictitious gas drag calibrated to the hydrodynamical runs, to follow the system from about 30 Schwarzschild radii into the GW-dominated regime. Over 100 phase-realization runs they report roughly 44% light-IMRI binary formation followed by an IMRI, 46% ejection after a temporary EMRI, 7% direct EMRI, and 3% IMRI-then-EMRI, leading to the central claim that two successive LISA-visible GW events are produced in most cases.

Significance. The hydrodynamical torque decomposition in Figures 4-5 is a valuable quantitative contribution: it separates the gaseous and tidal torque contributions and identifies the interfering density wave as an important early driver. The NoInnerDisk setup is a sensible way to bound the effect of inner-disk depletion, and the synchronized-migration state is demonstrated over about 300 orbital periods in the hydro runs. The PN three-body experiments are also useful as a proof of concept for Jacobi-capture outcomes in this astrophysical setting. However, the extrapolation from the hydro results to the two-event prediction relies on an untested constancy of the gas drag and on a scale-free argument for the inward extension to about 10 Schwarzschild radii, so the event-rate and LISA phenomenology claims are not yet robust. The paper is original and likely of interest to the AGN-EMRI community, but the central quantitative claim needs additional support.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.1] The central claim that two successive GW events occur in most cases depends on a constant fictitious gas drag in the PN code, calibrated from hydrodynamical runs at about 100 Schwarzschild radii and held fixed while the system shrinks into the GW-dominated regime. The paper's own hydro results show that the inner disk surface density drops by about 0.5 dex over 200 P0 in the InnerDisk runs (Figure 7), and for the adopted disk parameters (h/r=0.02, alpha=0.02) the viscous depletion timescale at 20-30 Schwarzschild radii is of order 5-10 years, comparable to the roughly 8-year inspiral shown in Figures 10-12. If the gas torque on the sBH fades as the inner disk drains, the sBH can decouple from the IMBH before the close encounter, converting the 'temporary EMRI followed by IMRI' outcomes into single-IMRI ejections. No sensitivity study over the gas-force amplitude or the depletion timescale is presented, so the quoted approximately 96% two-event fraction is not robust. The citation to Cerioli et al. (2016) motivates the assumption but does not replace a test for the specific disk parameters used here.
  2. [Section 4 and Section 5.1] The synchronized migration is directly demonstrated only at the simulation radius r0=100 Schwarzschild radii and over about 200-300 P0, during which the sBH semimajor axis changes by only about 0.1% (Figure 9). The extension of this result until approximately 10 Schwarzschild radii relies on a scale-free argument that all torques and timescales rescale identically, and on the constant-gas-force assumption in the PN code. The scale-free argument requires the disk surface density profile to be in the same steady state over two decades in radius, but Figure 7 shows that the inner disk is not stationary in the simulated cases; moreover, at radii well below 100 Schwarzschild radii the inner disk is expected to be depleted by the very processes the authors identify. The claim 'synchronized until about 10 Schwarzschild radii' should either be supported by an explicit model of the inner disk evolution or be softened to reflect that it is an extrapolation.
  3. [Section 6] The generalization to IMBHs less massive than 1000 solar masses is not demonstrated. The hydrodynamical runs are performed only for a 1000 solar mass IMBH, and the discussion in Section 6 argues qualitatively that the torques and the GW-dominated phase are similar for smaller gap-opening IMBHs. However, for a smaller IMBH the GW-dominated transition occurs at smaller radii, where the inner disk is most depleted and where the constant-gas-force assumption from Cerioli et al. (2016) is least secure. Since the event-rate estimates and the LISA phenomenology in Sections 5.4 and 6 depend on this extrapolation, the paper should either present supporting runs or explicitly restrict the conclusions to the simulated mass range.
  4. [Section 5.4] The statistical outcomes are obtained by varying only the initial phase angle of the sBH, while the initial semimajor axis ratio asBH/aIMBH=0.67 and the gas-force prescription are fixed. Given the chaotic sensitivity demonstrated in Figures 10-12, the outcome probabilities (44% binary formation, 46% ejection after a temporary EMRI, 7% direct EMRI, 3% IMRI-then-EMRI) may depend on these fixed choices. At minimum, the paper should present the probability brackets from the 100 runs and state that the distribution is illustrative of the possible outcomes, not a robust probability prediction, until a sensitivity test over initial separation and gas-force parameters is available.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.2, 5.3, and Figure captions] The initial phase angles appear to be swapped between the text and the figure captions. Section 5.2 describes the ejection case with initial phase angle 0.6 pi, while the caption of Figure 10 says 0.0 pi; Section 5.3 describes binary formation with initial phase angle 0.0 pi, while the caption of Figure 12 says 0.6 pi. These should be reconciled.
  2. [Section 4] There is a typo in the sentence 'or the parameters of our simulation' (should be 'for the parameters'), and Table 1 is formatted as 'T able 1' in the manuscript.
  3. [Section 5.2] The phrase 'tempoarary, failed EMRI' should be 'temporary, failed EMRI', and 'systen evolution' should be 'system evolution'.
  4. [Section 6] The event rate estimate of 1-10^2 per year is presented without a derivation of the systematic uncertainties from the number of sBHs per disk or the migration-trap efficiency; a brief quantitative breakdown would help readers assess the confidence in this number.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the PN fates are genuine dynamical outputs, and the hydro-calibrated gas force is a forward model ingredient rather than a fitted target.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The hydrodynamical simulations independently measure the gas and tidal torques on the sBH (Section 3, Figures 4 and 5) and demonstrate synchronized migration in both the InnerDisk and NoInnerDisk setups (Section 4, Figure 9). The PN three-body code (Section 5.1) is a separate tool: the fictitious gas force is calibrated to the hydro-derived torques, which is a standard modeling procedure, and the final fates (ejection versus binary formation versus EMRI) are obtained by integrating the PN equations for 100 different initial phases; these outcomes are not used to fit or define the gas force. The claim that two successive GW events occur in most cases follows from the simulated orbital radii at ejection or capture, not from the input assumptions by construction. The constant-gas-force assumption, justified by Cerioli et al. (2016), is a robustness concern rather than a circularity: if the inner disk drained faster, the statistics could change, but no equation in the paper reduces a measured output to a fitted input. The only self-citation to Paper I supplies the encounter scenario as a stated initial condition rather than as a derived result, so it provides context rather than a circular load-bearing step.

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

The central claim rests on a chain of modeling choices: a scale-free isothermal disk with chosen viscosity and aspect ratio, a calibrated gas drag in the PN code, and an assumed constancy of the inner disk during the final inspiral. The most consequential free parameters are the gas drag normalization and the initial separation ratio, which directly shape the outcome statistics. No result is derived from first principles without these inputs.

free parameters (6)
  • Gas drag force normalization in PN code = Not specified numerically
    Calibrated to hydro torque results in Section 5.1; the exact functional form and normalization are not given, and the force is reduced one dex inside the IMBH gap and switched off below 0.01 a_IMBH.
  • IMBH mass = 1000 Msun (10^-3 M_SMBH)
    Chosen for numerical resolution, 10 times larger than Paper I; generalization to smaller IMBHs is argued, not simulated.
  • Initial sBH semimajor axis (hydro) = 0.75 a_IMBH (InnerDisk and NoInnerDisk 075), 0.78 a_IMBH (NoInnerDisk 078)
    Hand-picked near the gap edge to test synchronized migration; the 0.78 case reaches synchronization.
  • Initial sBH to IMBH semimajor axis ratio (PN runs) = 0.67 (a_sBH=20 RS, a_IMBH=30 RS)
    Chosen slightly smaller than the hydro equilibrium value (0.78) to allow a relaxation stage before synchronized migration, per Section 5.1.
  • Disk surface density normalization and power index = Sigma0=10^-4, p=1 (InnerDisk); Sigma0=10^-5, p=1.5 (NoInnerDisk)
    Two disk models chosen to represent high and low inner disk mass; the p value is stated not to affect results qualitatively.
  • Viscous alpha and disk aspect ratio = alpha=0.02, h/r=0.02
    Chosen so the IMBH opens a gap; standard parameters but not derived from first principles.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The disk is locally isothermal with constant aspect ratio h/r=0.02, so the hydrodynamics is scale-free.
    Used in Section 2.1 for the equation of state and in Section 4 to extend the synchronized migration result to any radius until GW radiation dominates.
  • domain assumption The disk angular momentum transport follows Shakura-Sunyaev alpha viscosity with alpha=0.02.
    Viscosity model in Section 2.1; alpha=0.02 is chosen to enable gap opening.
  • domain assumption PN dynamics up to 2.5PN order fully captures the GW-driven evolution of the three-body system.
    The three-body code in Section 5.1 evolves the PN Hamiltonian to 2.5PN order; higher-order terms and spins are neglected.
  • ad hoc to paper The inner disk surface density remains approximately constant during the final GW-dominated inspiral.
    Assumed in Section 5.1 to justify a constant gas force; supported only by Cerioli et al. (2016) and not tested in this paper.
  • domain assumption The sBH and IMBH are initially on circular, coplanar orbits and the encounter has already occurred before the simulations begin.
    Initial conditions in Sections 2.2 and 5.1; the encounter and synchronization from Paper I are taken as the starting point, not re-derived here.
  • ad hoc to paper Results for the 1000 Msun IMBH generalize to less massive IMBHs that can still open a gap.
    Stated in Section 6 as a limitation but not demonstrated with additional simulations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The fate of EMRI-IMRI pairs in AGN accretion disks: hydrodynamic and three body simulations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SOUBO32Z

@misc{pith2026241116070,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The fate of EMRI-IMRI pairs in AGN accretion disks: hydrodynamic and three body simulations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SOUBO32Z}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16070}
}
abstract

Extreme-mass-ratio inspirals (EMRIs) and intermediate-mass-ratio inspirals (IMRIs) are important gravitational wave (GW) sources for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA). It has been recently suggested that EMRIs and IMRIs can both form in the accretion disk of an active galactic nucleus (AGN). Considering the likely encounter between a sBH and an IMBH during the migration in the AGN disk, Paper I showed that a gap-opening IMBH can drive a surrounding sBH to migrate synchronously. In this work, we extend the study in Paper I with a more sophisticated model. We first use 3D hydrodynamical simulations to study the co-evolution of the disk and the migration of a sBH in the vicinity of an IMBH. We find that the gaseous torque, together with the tidal torque exerted by the IMBH, can drive synchronized migration until $\sim 10$ Schwarzschild radii from the central supermassive black hole (SMBH). We further use a relativistic three-body code to study the final fate of the sBH in the GW-dominated regime. We find that the sBH can be either captured or kicked out by the IMBH, which will result in either two subsequent IMRIs or an EMRI followed by an IMRI. These events will bring rich information about the formation and evolution of sBHs and IMBHs in AGNs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16070 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Column density plots of the disk with the IMBH embedded in it. The x-axis and y-axis range from -2.5 to 2.5. Brighter color represents higher surface density and the color bar covers 5 orders of magnitude. The upper and lower panels represent the InnerDisk Σ5 and NoInnerDisk simulation at t = 0, 10, 150 P0 respectively. simulation units. The IMBH mass does not increase significantly during the simulation with this a… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Disk surface density profile when the gap struc￾ture converges (after 100 P0). The x-axis and y-axis show the radius in unit of r0 and the surface density of the disk in logarithmic coordinate. The locations of the sBH and the IMBH are marked with the red dotted line and the black dashed line, respectively. present. So the existence of the IMBH accelerates the inward migration of the sBH, qualitatively consistent wi… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Integrated torques and specific orbital angular momentum change of the sBH for InnerDisk Σ4. The red and the blue line represent the time integrated torque ex￾erted by gas particles and by the IMBH, respectively. The green line represents the total evolution of the orbital angu￾lar momentum of the sBH, while the orange line represents the contribution of the semimajor axis evolution on the an￾gular momentum change. … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Migration rate evolution of the sBH and IMBH. For clarity, we fit the semimajor axis evolution of the sBH with a simple exponential function, which can capture the general decreasing trend, shown by the inset. In the main fig￾ure, the red dashed line and the orange dot…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Disk surface density profile evolution after the sBH is put into the simulation, for InnerDisk Σ4. Blue dot￾ted, orange dashed and the green solid lines represent the surface density profile right after, 100 P0 after, and 200 P0 after the sBH is inserted in the simulat…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Disk surface density profile evolution for the re￾sult of NoInnerDisk. The blue, orange, green and red dashed line represents the disk profile 10, 20, 50 and 100 P0 after the start of the simulation. The purple, brown, pink and grey solid line represents the disk profi…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Migration of the sBH and the IMBH in the GW dominated scheme, for the case with initial sBH phase angle 0.0π. The orange and the blue lines represent the orbital radius of the IMBH and the sBH. The x-axis represents the time in unit of yr. The y-axis shows the orbital…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (a): Orbital radius of the sBH and the IMBH in the final stage, for the case with initial sBH phase angle 0.0π. The orange and the blue lines represent the orbital radii of the IMBH and the sBH respectively. The x-axis represents the time in unit of yr. The y-axis sho…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (a): Orbital radius of the sBH and the IMBH in the final stage, for the case with initial sBH phase angle 0.6π. The orange and the blue lines represent the orbital radii of the IMBH and the sBH respectively. The x-axis represents the time in unit of yr. The y-axis sho…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Distribution of different kinds of outcomes for different simulations. The red, green, blue and pink strips represent the outcome of ejection, binary formation, sBH still within ∼ 10 RS after ejection and complete EMRI before IMRI [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p0…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Ten examples of the sBH and IMBH orbital evolution in the GW dominated scheme, with sBH initial phase angle as 0.0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6 and 1.8 π. The orange and blue lines represent the orbital radius of IMBH and sBH, respectively. The x-axis repre…

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. Ringdown and lensing of triple systems

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Numerical relativity simulations of triple black hole systems reveal redshift effects and gravitational lensing in ringdown signals from head-on mergers, with no additional black hole formation from amplified waves.

  2. The implications of stochastic gas torques for asymmetric binaries in the LISA band

    gr-qc 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Hydrodynamic stochastic gas torques do not bias the recovered binary parameters of EMRI/IMRI signals in LISA, but they can bias or hide the inferred accretion disk torque amplitude and slope.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  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 ...

  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...

  3. [3]

    (״'oQ#DhZi # X LL .7:K[+ .\- l vc'\]6J D[WDK, Ī3I2

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt 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 Each re...

    arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    2018, Living Reviews in Relativity, 21, 4, 10.1007/s41114-018-0013-8

    Amaro-Seoane , P. 2018, Living Reviews in Relativity, 21, 4, 10.1007/s41114-018-0013-8

    doi:10.1007/s41114-018-0013-8 2018

  5. [5]

    R., Freitag , M., et al

    Amaro-Seoane , P., Gair , J. R., Freitag , M., et al. 2007, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 24, R113, 10.1088/0264-9381/24/17/R01

    doi:10.1088/0264-9381/24/17/r01 2007

  6. [6]

    J., & Natarajan , P

    Armitage , P. J., & Natarajan , P. 2002, , 567, L9, 10.1086/339770

    doi:10.1086/339770 2002

  7. [7]

    Artymowicz , P., Lin , D. N. C., & Wampler , E. J. 1993, , 409, 592, 10.1086/172690

    doi:10.1086/172690 1993

  8. [8]

    Artymowicz , P., & Lubow , S. H. 1994, , 421, 651, 10.1086/173679

    doi:10.1086/173679 1994

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    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

    2017 doi

  2. [10]

    R., Bonnell , I

    Bate , M. R., Bonnell , I. A., & Price , N. M. 1995, , 277, 362, 10.1093/mnras/277.2.362

    1995 doi

  3. [11]

    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

    2016 doi

  4. [13]

    2023 b , , 518, 5653, 10.1093/mnras/stac3495

    ---. 2023 b , , 518, 5653, 10.1093/mnras/stac3495

    2023 doi

  5. [14]

    2021, , 502, 3554, 10.1093/mnras/stab222

    Bonetti , M., Bortolas , E., Lupi , A., & Dotti , M. 2021, , 502, 3554, 10.1093/mnras/stab222

    2021 doi

  6. [15]

    2016, , 461, 4419, 10.1093/mnras/stw1590

    Bonetti , M., Haardt , F., Sesana , A., & Barausse , E. 2016, , 461, 4419, 10.1093/mnras/stw1590

    2016 doi

  7. [16]

    Cerioli , A., Lodato , G., & Price , D. J. 2016, , 457, 939, 10.1093/mnras/stw034

    2016 doi

  8. [17]

    Chakrabarti , S. K. 1993, , 411, 610, 10.1086/172863

    1993 doi

  9. [18]

    Chen , Y.-X., & Lin , D. N. C. 2023, , 522, 319, 10.1093/mnras/stad992

    2023 doi

  10. [19]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2205.10382

    Derdzinski , A., & Mayer , L. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2205.10382. 2205.10382

    2022 arXiv

  11. [20]

    2024, , 972, 193, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5cf2

    Dodici , M., & Tremaine , S. 2024, , 972, 193, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5cf2

    2024 doi

  12. [21]

    J., & Loeb , A

    D'Orazio , D. J., & Loeb , A. 2020, prd, 101, 083031, 10.1103/PhysRevD.101.083031

    2020 doi

  13. [22]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 749, 10.1038/s41550-021-01398-w

    Gerosa , D., & Fishbach , M. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 749, 10.1038/s41550-021-01398-w

    2021 doi

  14. [23]

    1980, , 241, 425, 10.1086/158356

    Goldreich , P., & Tremaine , S. 1980, , 241, 425, 10.1086/158356

    1980 doi

  15. [24]

    Goodman , J., & Tan , J. C. 2004, , 608, 108, 10.1086/386360

    2004 doi

  16. [25]

    2000, , 532, L29, 10.1086/312562

    Gould , A., & Rix , H.-W. 2000, , 532, L29, 10.1086/312562

    2000 doi

  17. [26]

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

    2024 doi

  18. [27]

    M., & Ward , W

    Hahn , J. M., & Ward , W. R. 1996, in Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Vol. 27, Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 479

    1996

  19. [28]

    Hills , J. G. 1988, , 331, 687, 10.1038/331687a0

    1988 doi

  20. [30]

    1999 b , , 307, 79, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02623.x

    ---. 1999 b , , 307, 79, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02623.x

    1999

  21. [31]

    D., Tanaka , H., & Szuszkiewicz , E

    Kanagawa , K. D., Tanaka , H., & Szuszkiewicz , E. 2018, , 861, 140, 10.3847/1538-4357/aac8d9

    2018 doi

  22. [32]

    2001, , 376, 686, 10.1051/0004-6361:20011009

    Karas , V., & S ubr , L. 2001, , 376, 686, 10.1051/0004-6361:20011009

    2001 doi

  23. [33]

    2011, , 84, 024032, 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.024032

    Kocsis , B., Yunes , N., & Loeb , A. 2011, , 84, 024032, 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.024032

    2011 doi

  24. [34]

    2003, arXiv e-prints, astro

    Levin , Y. 2003, arXiv e-prints, astro. astro-ph/0307084

    2003 arXiv

  25. [35]

    2022 a , , 934, 154, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c0d

    Li , J., Lai , D., & Rodet , L. 2022 a , , 934, 154, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c0d

    2022 doi

  26. [36]

    M., Li , H., Li , S., & Li , J

    Li , Y.-P., Dempsey , A. M., Li , H., Li , S., & Li , J. 2022 b , , 928, L19, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac60fd

    2022 doi

  27. [37]

    Lin , D. N. C., & Papaloizou , J. 1979 a , mnras, 186, 799, 10.1093/mnras/186.4.799

    1979 doi

  28. [38]

    1979 b , mnras, 188, 191, 10.1093/mnras/188.2.191

    ---. 1979 b , mnras, 188, 191, 10.1093/mnras/188.2.191

    1979 doi

  29. [39]

    1986, , 309, 846, 10.1086/164653

    ---. 1986, , 309, 846, 10.1086/164653

    1986 doi

  30. [40]

    2008, Gravitational waves: Volume 1: Theory and experiments, Vol

    Maggiore, M. 2008, Gravitational waves: Volume 1: Theory and experiments, Vol. 1 (Oxford university press)

    2008

  31. [41]

    B., & Loeb , A

    Mastrobuono-Battisti , A., Perets , H. B., & Loeb , A. 2014, , 796, 40, 10.1088/0004-637X/796/1/40

    2014 doi

  32. [43]

    2012 b , , 425, 460, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21486.x

    ---. 2012 b , , 425, 460, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21486.x

    2012

  33. [44]

    McKernan , B., Ford , K. E. S., Lyra , W., et al. 2011, , 417, L103, 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01132.x

    2011

  34. [45]

    D., & Dermott , S

    Murray , C. D., & Dermott , S. F. 1999, Solar system dynamics

    1999

  35. [46]

    J., Baruteau , C., & Kley , W

    Paardekooper , S. J., Baruteau , C., & Kley , W. 2011, , 410, 293, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17442.x

    2011

  36. [47]

    2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2104.01208

    Pan , Z., Lyu , Z., & Yang , H. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2104.01208. 2104.01208

    2021 arXiv

  37. [48]

    2021, , 103, 103018, 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.103018

    Pan , Z., & Yang , H. 2021, , 103, 103018, 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.103018

    2021 doi

  38. [49]

    2021, , 505, 1324, 10.1093/mnras/stab1419

    Peng , P., & Chen , X. 2021, , 505, 1324, 10.1093/mnras/stab1419

    2021 doi

  39. [50]

    2023, , 950, 3, 10.3847/1538-4357/acce3b

    ---. 2023, , 950, 3, 10.3847/1538-4357/acce3b

    2023 doi

  40. [51]

    Pierens , A., & Nelson , R. P. 2008, aap, 482, 333, 10.1051/0004-6361:20079062

    2008 doi

  41. [52]

    2008, , 386, 1347, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.12871.x

    Podlewska , E., & Szuszkiewicz , E. 2008, , 386, 1347, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.12871.x

    2008

  42. [53]

    J., Wurster , J., Tricco , T

    Price , D. J., Wurster , J., Tricco , T. S., et al. 2018, , 35, e031, 10.1017/pasa.2018.25

    2018 doi

  43. [54]

    S \'a nchez-Salcedo , F. J. 2020, , 897, 142, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b2d

    2020 doi

  44. [55]

    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

    2019 doi

  45. [56]

    2020, , 903, 133, 10.3847/1538-4357/abbc1d

    ---. 2020, , 903, 133, 10.3847/1538-4357/abbc1d

    2020 doi

  46. [57]

    I., & Sunyaev , R

    Shakura , N. I., & Sunyaev , R. A. 1973, , 24, 337

    1973

  47. [58]

    C., Metzger , B

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

    2017 doi

  48. [59]

    J., & Rees , M

    Syer , D., Clarke , C. J., & Rees , M. J. 1991, , 250, 505, 10.1093/mnras/250.3.505

    1991 doi

  49. [60]

    2021, , 507, 3362, 10.1093/mnras/stab2315

    Tagawa , H., Haiman , Z., Bartos , I., Kocsis , B., & Omukai , K. 2021, , 507, 3362, 10.1093/mnras/stab2315

    2021 doi

  50. [61]

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

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

    2020 doi

  51. [62]

    2019, prd, 100, 063012, 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.063012

    Torres-Orjuela , A., Chen , X., Cao , Z., Amaro-Seoane , P., & Peng , P. 2019, prd, 100, 063012, 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.063012

    2019 doi

  52. [63]

    2003, , 582, 559, 10.1086/344675

    Volonteri , M., Haardt , F., & Madau , P. 2003, , 582, 559, 10.1086/344675

    2003 doi

  53. [64]

    1999, , 352, 452

    S ubr , L., & Karas , V. 1999, , 352, 452. astro-ph/9910401

    1999 arXiv

  54. [65]

    Ward , W. R. 1997, , 126, 261, 10.1006/icar.1996.5647

    1997

  55. [66]

    2019 a , , 100, 124056, 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.124056

    Yang , H., Bonga , B., Peng , Z., & Li , G. 2019 a , , 100, 124056, 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.124056

    2019 doi

  56. [67]

    2024, , 534, 485, 10.1093/mnras/stae2097

    Yang , H., & Li , Y.-P. 2024, , 534, 485, 10.1093/mnras/stae2097

    2024 doi

  57. [68]

    2019 b , , 123, 181101, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.181101

    Yang , Y., Bartos , I., Gayathri , V., et al. 2019 b , , 123, 181101, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.181101

    2019 doi

  58. [69]

    2023, , 521, 2919, 10.1093/mnras/stad728

    Zhang , X., & Chen , X. 2023, , 521, 2919, 10.1093/mnras/stad728

    2023 doi

  59. [70]

    2024, , 968, 122, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4549

    Zhang , Z., & Chen , X. 2024, , 968, 122, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4549

    2024 doi

Pith tools

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