Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 6 cited by

The paper argues that when an equal-mass black-hole binary shrinks below the boson Bohr radius, ultralight bosons form bound 'molecules' whose ionization can dominate gravitational-wave emission and reshape the nanohertz gravitational-wave

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 18:46 UTC pith:JUL2EVW3

load-bearing objection The co-moving/non-co-moving split and the eccentricity-driven ionization channel are genuinely new and well supported; the SGWB turnover is a sharp prediction, but its astrophysical reach rests on a molecular mass at a~1 that the paper itself leaves under-demonstrated. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.09643 v2 pith:JUL2EVW3 submitted 2025-09-11 gr-qc astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-ph

Ultralight Boson Ionization from Comparable-Mass Binary Black Holes

Yuhao Guo , Zhen Zhong , Yifan Chen , Vitor Cardoso , Taishi Ikeda , Lihang Zhou This is my paper
classification gr-qc astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-ph
keywords ultralight bosonsgravitational moleculesblack hole binariesboson ionizationstochastic gravitational wave backgroundorbital circularizationpulsar timing arrays
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper tries to show that ultralight bosons around comparable-mass black-hole binaries can form gravitationally bound 'molecular' states once the binary separation falls below the boson's Bohr radius. The binary's orbital motion ionizes these states, draining energy and angular momentum from the orbit, and at early inspiral this ionization can be stronger than gravitational-wave emission. The co-moving inner part of the molecule ionizes only when the orbit is eccentric, which tends to circularize the binary, while the non-co-moving halo ionizes even for circular orbits. The authors back this with numerical simulations and a semi-analytic Fermi Golden Rule calculation, and they translate the backreaction into a predicted spectral turnover in the stochastic gravitational-wave background at roughly 2.8 nHz for a benchmark population. If correct, the mechanism offers a new environmental explanation for the spectral turnover seen in pulsar timing array data.

Core claim

Gravitational molecules exist around comparable-mass binaries when the separation a is less than the boson Bohr radius r_b. The bound state splits into a co-moving inner region that corotates with the binary and a non-co-moving outer halo. For circular orbits the dominant ionization channel is the non-co-moving (l,m)=(2,2) mode at harmonic N=2; for eccentric orbits a co-moving (0,0) channel at N=1 appears and scales as e^2. Ionization extracts orbital energy and angular momentum: the co-moving channel damps eccentricity, while the non-co-moving channel increases it but only dominates for extremely small separations (a-tilde below about 10^-3). Compared with gravitational-wave emission, ioniz

What carries the argument

The central object is the gravitational molecule: a hydrogenic bound state of ultralight bosons around a comparable-mass binary, split into a co-moving inner region V_C (approximately r<a) that corotates with the binary and an outer non-co-moving region V_notC (r>a). The engine of the argument is a Fermi Golden Rule ionization calculation: the binary's time-dependent potential is decomposed into Fourier harmonics NΩ, and each harmonic drives transitions from the ground bound state to continuum states. The co-moving potential is derived by transforming to the co-rotating, radially breathing frame; it contains inertial terms that vanish for circular orbits and scale linearly with eccentricity,

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that a boson cloud with mass roughly one to ten percent of the binary mass is already present when the separation drops below the Bohr radius; the paper's own timescales suggest gravitational relaxation and ionization take comparable times near ã=1, so this formation-with-survival step is not demonstrated.

What would settle it

Evolve a q=1 binary at ã=0.8 with an initial boson cloud of mass fraction Mg/M=0.1 for several hundred orbits in a full numerical relativity simulation and compare the measured energy and angular-momentum loss rates with Eqs. (9)-(10); alternatively, measure the nanohertz SGWB turnover frequency across binary populations and check whether it follows the predicted scaling f_t ∝ (Mg/M)^0.26 α^1.7 M^-1 rather than being set only by the binary mass distribution.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The stochastic gravitational-wave background from supermassive binaries would develop a spectral turnover around 2.8 nHz for the benchmark parameters, with a nearly linear strain-frequency relation in the ionization-dominated regime.
  • The turnover frequency depends on the boson mass, the cloud mass fraction, and the binary mass, so pulsar timing array measurements of the turnover could be used to infer or constrain these quantities.
  • Eccentric binaries are expected to circularize early in the molecular phase because the co-moving ionization channel is driven by eccentricity, so surviving supermassive binaries in the PTA band should have low eccentricity.
  • The ionization process depletes the boson cloud, and the initial cloud mass at ã=1 is a key parameter controlling how long ionization can dominate over gravitational-wave emission.
  • For equal-mass binaries only even multipoles contribute, so unequal-mass binaries would produce additional odd multipole ionization channels and a modified spectrum.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If this mechanism is real, the inferred cloud mass fraction from a measured turnover frequency would be degenerate with the boson mass and binary mass, making it difficult to uniquely pin down the boson properties without independent mass and eccentricity measurements.
  • The paper's own timescales put gravitational relaxation (~2×10^5 yr) and ionization (~4.6×10^5 yr) at comparable order near ã=1, so the formation of a sufficiently massive cloud is the least certain step; a lighter cloud would weaken or eliminate the turnover prediction entirely.
  • The same ionization logic applied to stellar-mass binaries would shift the turnover to much higher frequencies, potentially producing observable features for space-based or ground-based detectors, though the backreaction would be far weaker.
  • If co-moving ionization indeed circularizes binaries, the eccentricity distribution of supermassive black-hole binaries in the nanohertz band should show a bias toward circular orbits, providing an independent observable test beyond the spectral turnover.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper studies an equal-mass binary black hole embedded in an ultralight scalar field. Using GRDzhadzha simulations with benchmark parameters μM=0.2, ã=0.8, and several eccentricities, it shows the formation of gravitational-molecule bound states and computes their ionization spectra. A semi-analytic Fermi Golden Rule framework separates the ionization due to co-moving and non-co-moving parts of the bound state, yielding scaling laws for the dominant rates Γ_C(1)00 and Γ_/C(2)22. These rates are then used to evolve the binary semi-major axis and eccentricity under ionization backreaction. The paper concludes that ionization can dominate gravitational-wave emission in the early molecular phase, circularize the orbit, and produce a turnover in the stochastic gravitational-wave background near f_t≈2.8 nHz for a benchmark population.

Significance. The molecular-ionization mechanism and the prediction of eccentricity-driven circularization of the co-moving component are new and potentially relevant for interpreting pulsar-timing-array data. The manuscript contains a documented convergence test (Supplemental I.D), analytic scaling estimates for the form factors, and a transparent separation of co-moving and non-co-moving ionization. These are genuine strengths. However, the observable turnover prediction depends on the assumed pre-existence of a 5–10% molecular cloud at ã≈1, and the validation of the semi-analytic rates against the simulations is incomplete at the level needed to support the quantitative orbital-evolution claims. If these points are addressed, the paper would be a valuable contribution to the environmental-effects and ultralight-boson literature.

major comments (3)
  1. [Supplemental IV; main Eq. (11), Fig. 3] The central SGWB-turnover claim requires an initial bound-state mass fraction Mg/M≈0.05–0.1 at ã=1. The formation route in Supplemental IV is not demonstrated. At the benchmark α=0.01, the gravitational relaxation time in Eq. (S44), τ_gr≈2×10^5 yr, is comparable to the ionization time in Eq. (S46), τ_ion≈4.6×10^5 yr at ã=1. For the values α=0.03–0.06 actually used in Fig. 3, τ_ion is shorter by (0.01/α)^2 unless τ_gr also grows with α, making formation-versus-ionization even more marginal. The text itself concedes that “it remains unclear whether large clouds can survive tidal disruption.” Since da/dt|ion is linear in Mg (Eq. 10) and f_t in Eq. (11) scales as (Mg/M)^0.26, a surviving mass substantially below 5% would suppress or eliminate ionization dominance. The paper should either provide a quantitative formation/survival calculation or present the predictions under a conservative mas
  2. [III, Eqs. (3)–(10); Supplemental II.D] The semi-analytic model predicts a (0,0):(2,0):(2,2) ratio of 6:1:1, while the simulation gives 6:1:3. The paper attributes the discrepancy to an “initial subdominant (2,2) contribution in the state ψ_g,” but no quantitative calculation of this correction is supplied. More importantly, the absolute rates Γ_C(1)00 and Γ_/C(2)22 that enter Eqs. (9), (10), and (11) are evaluated from the paper’s own form-factor integrals, Eqs. (S26) and (S30), and are not compared with absolute ionization fluxes extracted from the simulation; only peak positions and relative heights are compared. The simulation is performed at α=0.2, while the scaling derivation assumes α≪1 and the phenomenological application uses α=0.03–0.06. The authors should quantify the simulation/semi-analytic agreement in absolute rates (or in the resulting da/dt and de/dt) and propagate the observed discrepancy into an uncertainty
  3. [IV, Eq. (11), Fig. 3; Supplemental III.B] The predicted SGWB turnover is computed for a delta-function population, Eq. (S39), δ(M−10^9 M_⊙)δ(z)δ(q−1). Since f_t in Eq. (11) scales as M^−1, a realistic mass distribution will broaden the turnover; non-equal mass ratios and nonzero redshifts will further smear the feature. The abstract and Discussion state the spectrum “can be directly tested by current PTA observations,” which is stronger than what a toy population supports. Please add a consistency check with a more realistic SMBHB mass/redshift distribution, or temper the claim to reflect the idealized population used.
minor comments (6)
  1. [III, first paragraph] Typo: “an semi-analytic framework” should be “a semi-analytic framework.”
  2. [Supplemental II.A] “From Fig. II in the maintext” appears to be a misreference; the relevant figure is Fig. 1.
  3. [Supplemental IV, Eq. (S44)] Please check the dimensions and scaling of Eq. (S44). The factor (μ/10^−21 eV) appears with no exponent; the sign and power of the μ-dependence matter for the formation argument and should be stated explicitly.
  4. [IV, Eq. (11)] The analytic formula for f_t is stated without derivation. Since it anchors the main observable prediction, a brief derivation or a pointer to the corresponding calculation in the Supplemental Material would improve the paper.
  5. [References] Reference [111] is cited with the placeholder arXiv number 2509.xxxx. This needs to be updated before publication.
  6. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption describes the plotted quantity as “ionization fluxes,” but the vertical axis is the spectral amplitude |F[φ̃_lm]| at r=300M. Clarify the relation between this amplitude and the actual ionization flux.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the ionization rates are computed from first-principles form-factor integrals, and the turnover/circularization predictions are derived consequences, not fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained at the level claimed. Ionization rates are obtained by numerically evaluating the analytic form-factor integrals in Eq. (3) and Eq. (S26), yielding Eq. (9) and Eq. (S30); these coefficients are not fit to the simulation. The comparison to Fig. 2 is a validation step, and the noted discrepancy in the (2,2) mode is attributed to an unmodeled subdominant initial component, not used to adjust the central rates. Orbital evolution rates (Eqs. 8, 10) follow from energy/angular-momentum conservation, and the turnover frequency (Eq. 11) results from equating ionization and GW-driven da/dt, with exponents derived from the scaling of the computed rates. The SGWB turnover is therefore a consequence of the assumed molecular mass and the computed ionization physics, not an input renamed as a prediction. The co-rotation premise is supported by the paper's own simulation (Fig. 1), so the self-citation to prior work on gravitational molecules is not load-bearing. The main weakness—whether a sufficient cloud mass M_g/M~0.05–0.1 survives at ã≈1—is an astrophysical formation uncertainty, explicitly conceded in Supplemental Sec. IV, not a circular derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities: the gravitational molecule is a bound state from ref. [27], and no new particles, forces, or dimensions are postulated. The central claim rests instead on: the existence of a pre-formed cloud (free parameter Mg/M), the approximate binary metric, hydrogenic wavefunctions, first-order perturbation theory, the isotropic co-moving region V_C approximately r less than a, neglect of self-gravity and BH absorption, and a toy population for the SGWB. The two fitted numbers are the normalization anchor of the form-factor coefficients and the exponent fit in the turnover formula.

free parameters (3)
  • Normalization anchor of form-factor coefficients = unity at a-tilde=0.5, alpha=0.05
    Eqs. (9) and (S30): the dimensionless coefficients of the ionization rates are anchored at one point; the shape in (a-tilde, alpha) is computed from the paper integrals (Fig. S2), so the anchor sets the overall scale of the rates.
  • Transition-frequency prefactor and exponents in f_t = 2.8 nHz, exponent 0.26 in Mg/M, 1.7 in alpha
    Eq. (11): presented as the characteristic turnover; the power-law scalings are read from the numerical orbital evolution and their derivation is not shown in the text.
  • Initial bound-state mass fraction Mg/M at a-tilde=1 = 0.05 to 0.1 (scanned)
    Input to the SGWB computation and to the claim that ionization dominates GW emission; the formation estimate in Supplemental IV bounds the ejected mass at roughly 4.7% and does not guarantee a cloud of 5-10% is present.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption The approximate binary metric Eq. (1) (Bamber et al. prescription) accurately captures the scalar-field dynamics in the molecular regime
    Invoked in Sec. II; the simulations and the extracted bound-state spectrum rest on this metric, which is Schwarzschild near each hole and weak-field at large radii.
  • domain assumption Molecular bound states are well approximated by hydrogenic wavefunctions of a spherical gravitational atom
    Eqs. (S21)-(S23); the ionization form factors and rates are computed from these hydrogenic states; the paper supports this by the inset of Fig. 1 (peak positions and radial profiles) but it is an approximation.
  • domain assumption Fermi Golden Rule (first-order perturbation theory) gives the ionization rate
    Eq. (3) and Sec. III; standard for gravitational-atom ionization but presupposes a small perturbation and no strong level mixing.
  • domain assumption The scalar field self-gravity is negligible
    Supplemental I.A; questionable for Mg/M up to 0.1 used in the SGWB predictions.
  • ad hoc to paper The co-moving region is isotropic with V_C approximately r less than a
    Sec. III and Supplemental II.D; the paper states this overestimates the co-moving range and develops an anisotropic (2,2) correction to explain the spectrum.
  • domain assumption BH absorption and accretion are negligible during the molecular phase
    Supplemental III.B (Eq. S38); the orbital evolution keeps only ionization as the mass-loss channel.
  • ad hoc to paper The binary population is a delta function at M=10^9 solar masses, z=0, q=1
    Eq. (S39); toy population for the SGWB spectra, not a realistic population synthesis.
  • ad hoc to paper Molecular formation via gravitational relaxation and mass transfer provides Mg/M of order 0.01 to 0.1 at a-tilde about 1
    Supplemental IV; the ionization-vs-relaxation timescales are comparable at a-tilde about 1, and the paper states it is unclear whether large clouds survive tidal disruption.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 5162 in / 5040 out tokens · 238452 ms · 2026-08-04T18:46:03.393309+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Ultralight bosons around comparable-mass binaries can form gravitationally bound states analogous to molecules once the binary separation decreases below the boson's Bohr radius, with the inner region co-moving with the binary. We simulate the formation of these gravitational molecules, determine their co-moving regions, and compute ionization fluxes induced by orbital motion for various binary eccentricities. We develop semi-analytic formalisms to describe the ionization dynamics of both the co-moving and non-co-moving regions, demonstrating consistency with numerical simulation results. From ionization fluxes, we estimate their backreaction on binary orbital evolution. At early stages, molecule ionization can dominate over gravitational wave emission, producing a spectral turnover in the gravitational wave background. Additionally, ionization of the co-moving component occurs solely due to binary eccentricity, causing orbital circularization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09643 by Lihang Zhou, Taishi Ikeda, Vitor Cardoso, Yifan Chen, Yuhao Guo, Zhen Zhong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Simulation of a scalar field with mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Frequency spectra of the three dominant scalar spher [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. SGWB spectra from SMBHB populations for dif [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Perturbing Gravitational Atoms: Negative Love, Resonant Tides and Shifted Resonances

    gr-qc 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0

    Spinning gravitational atoms have negative static Love numbers enhanced by O(10²–10³) over non-spinning clouds, with internal perturbations shifting binary resonances.

  2. Trails of clouds in binary black holes

    gr-qc 2025-12 conditional novelty 7.0

    Boson clouds around binary black holes generically deplete through orbital resonances, driving eccentricity and spin-orbit tilt toward fixed points—including off-equatorial ones—leaving observable gravitational-wave trails.

  3. Constraining interacting dark energy models with black hole superradiance

    astro-ph.CO 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Black hole superradiance constrains the coupling strength in interacting dark energy-dark matter models through modifications to the effective mass of ultralight bosons in two scenarios.

  4. Gravitational superfluorescence from superradiant axion clouds

    gr-qc 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Superradiant axion clouds around black holes can undergo gravitational superfluorescence via a seeded coherent quadrupolar transition, leading to a detectable delayed gravitational-wave pulse.

  5. Stellar Superradiance and Low-Energy Absorption in Dense Nuclear Media

    hep-ph 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Collective nucleon scattering in neutron-star matter suppresses the effective absorption of ultralight bosons at the long wavelengths relevant for superradiance, weakening the link between stellar cooling bounds and s...

  6. Scalar fields around black hole binaries in LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA

    gr-qc 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Semi-analytic waveform model for scalar environments around black hole binaries is validated against numerical relativity and applied to LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA data to obtain upper limits on scalar densities with tentative ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 95 linked inside Pith · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Obser- vation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “Obser- vation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,” Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background,

    Gabriella Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background,” Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L8 (2023), arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - III. Search for gravitational wave signals,

    J. Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA:), “The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - III. Search for gravitational wave signals,” Astron. Astro- phys.678, A50 (2023), arXiv:2306.16214 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pul- sar Timing Array,

    Daniel J. Reardonet al., “Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pul- sar Timing Array,” Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L6 (2023), arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochas- tic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,

    Heng Xuet al., “Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochas- tic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,” Res. Astron. Astrophys.23, 075024 (2023), arXiv:2306.16216 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Constraints on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries from the Gravitational-wave Background,

    Gabriella Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Constraints on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries from the Gravitational-wave Background,” As- trophys. J. Lett.952, L37 (2023), arXiv:2306.16220 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - IV. Implications for massive black holes, dark matter, and the early Universe,

    J. Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA), “The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - IV. Implications for massive black holes, dark matter, and the early Universe,” Astron. Astrophys.685, A94 (2024), arXiv:2306.16227 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    The dynamical evolution of mas- sive black hole binaries - I. hardening in a fixed stellar background,

    Gerald D. Quinlan, “The dynamical evolution of mas- sive black hole binaries - I. hardening in a fixed stellar background,” New Astron.1, 35–56 (1996), arXiv:astro- ph/9601092

    arXiv 1996

  9. [9]

    Formation of galactic nuclei,

    Milos Milosavljevic and David Merritt, “Formation of galactic nuclei,” Astrophys. J.563, 34–62 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0103350

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  10. [10]

    Binary black hole mergers from planet-like migrations,

    Andrew Gould and Hans-Walter Rix, “Binary black hole mergers from planet-like migrations,” Astrophys. J. Lett.532, L29 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9912111

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  11. [11]

    Accre- tion during the merger of supermassive black holes,

    Philip J. Armitage and Priyamvada Natarajan, “Accre- tion during the merger of supermassive black holes,” Astrophys. J. Lett.567, L9–L12 (2002), arXiv:astro- ph/0201318

    arXiv 2002

  12. [12]

    Galaxy Tomography with the Gravitational Wave Background from Super- massive Black Hole Binaries,

    Yifan Chenet al.(NANOGrav), “Galaxy Tomography with the Gravitational Wave Background from Super- massive Black Hole Binaries,” (2024), arXiv:2411.05906 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Cos- mology of the Invisible Axion,

    John Preskill, Mark B. Wise, and Frank Wilczek, “Cos- mology of the Invisible Axion,” Phys. Lett. B120, 127– 132 (1983)

    1983

  14. [14]

    A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion,

    L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, “A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion,” Phys. Lett. B120, 133–136 (1983)

    1983

  15. [15]

    The Not So Harmless Axion,

    Michael Dine and Willy Fischler, “The Not So Harmless Axion,” Phys. Lett. B120, 137–141 (1983)

    1983

  16. [16]

    Axions In String Theory,

    Peter Svrcek and Edward Witten, “Axions In String Theory,” JHEP06, 051 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0605206

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  17. [17]

    Kinetic Mixing of the Photon with Hidden U(1)s in String Phenomenology,

    S. A. Abel, M. D. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, V. V. Khoze, and A. Ringwald, “Kinetic Mixing of the Photon with Hidden U(1)s in String Phenomenology,” JHEP07, 124 (2008), arXiv:0803.1449 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  18. [18]

    String Axiverse,

    Asimina Arvanitaki, Savas Dimopoulos, Sergei Dubovsky, Nemanja Kaloper, and John March- Russell, “String Axiverse,” Phys. Rev. D81, 123530 (2010), arXiv:0905.4720 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  19. [19]

    Naturally Light Hidden Photons in LARGE Volume String Compactifications,

    Mark Goodsell, Joerg Jaeckel, Javier Redondo, and Andreas Ringwald, “Naturally Light Hidden Photons in LARGE Volume String Compactifications,” JHEP11, 027 (2009), arXiv:0909.0515 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  20. [20]

    Cold and fuzzy dark matter,

    Wayne Hu, Rennan Barkana, and Andrei Gruzinov, “Cold and fuzzy dark matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 1158–1161 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0003365

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  21. [21]

    KLEIN-GORDON EQUATION AND ROTATING BLACK HOLES,

    Steven L. Detweiler, “KLEIN-GORDON EQUATION AND ROTATING BLACK HOLES,” Phys. Rev. D22, 2323–2326 (1980)

    1980

  22. [22]

    Super- radiance: New Frontiers in Black Hole Physics,

    Richard Brito, Vitor Cardoso, and Paolo Pani, “Super- radiance: New Frontiers in Black Hole Physics,” Lect. Notes Phys.906, pp.1–237 (2015), arXiv:1501.06570 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    The Spectra of Gravitational Atoms,

    Daniel Baumann, Horng Sheng Chia, John Stout, and Lotte ter Haar, “The Spectra of Gravitational Atoms,” JCAP12, 006 (2019), arXiv:1908.10370 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  24. [24]

    Axion reso- nances in binary pulsar systems,

    Mor Rozner, Evgeni Grishin, Yonadav Barry Ginat, An- drei P. Igoshev, and Vincent Desjacques, “Axion reso- nances in binary pulsar systems,” JCAP03, 061 (2020), 7 arXiv:1904.01958 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  25. [25]

    Secular effects of ultralight dark matter on bi- nary pulsars,

    Diego Blas, Diana L´ opez Nacir, and Sergey Sibiryakov, “Secular effects of ultralight dark matter on bi- nary pulsars,” Phys. Rev. D101, 063016 (2020), arXiv:1910.08544 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  26. [26]

    Binary pulsars as probes for spin- 2 ultralight dark matter,

    Juan Manuel Armaleo, Diana L´ opez Nacir, and Fed- erico R. Urban, “Binary pulsars as probes for spin- 2 ultralight dark matter,” JCAP01, 053 (2020), arXiv:1909.13814 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  27. [27]

    Black hole binaries and light fields: Gravitational molecules,

    Taishi Ikeda, Laura Bernard, Vitor Cardoso, and Miguel Zilh˜ ao, “Black hole binaries and light fields: Gravitational molecules,” Phys. Rev. D103, 024020 (2021), arXiv:2010.00008 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  28. [28]

    Response of ultralight dark matter to supermassive black holes and binaries,

    Lorenzo Annulli, Vitor Cardoso, and Rodrigo Vicente, “Response of ultralight dark matter to supermassive black holes and binaries,” Phys. Rev. D102, 063022 (2020), arXiv:2009.00012 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  29. [29]

    Ejection of supermassive black holes and implica- tions for merger rates in fuzzy dark matter haloes,

    Amr El-Zant, Zacharias Roupas, and Joseph Silk, “Ejection of supermassive black holes and implica- tions for merger rates in fuzzy dark matter haloes,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.499, 2575–2586 (2020), arXiv:2009.10167 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [30]

    The BH-PSR Gravi- tational Molecule,

    Tao Liu and Kun-Feng Lyu, “The BH-PSR Gravi- tational Molecule,” (2021), arXiv:2107.09971 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    Binary Supermassive Black Holes Or- biting Dark Matter Solitons: From the Dual AGN in UGC4211 to NanoHertz Gravitational Waves,

    Tom Broadhurst, Chao Chen, Tao Liu, and Kai- Feng Zheng, “Binary Supermassive Black Holes Or- biting Dark Matter Solitons: From the Dual AGN in UGC4211 to NanoHertz Gravitational Waves,” (2023), arXiv:2306.17821 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    Bounds on ultralight dark matter from NANOGrav,

    Mohammad Aghaie, Giovanni Armando, Alessandro Dondarini, and Paolo Panci, “Bounds on ultralight dark matter from NANOGrav,” Phys. Rev. D109, 103030 (2024), arXiv:2308.04590 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    Final parsec problem of black hole mergers and ultralight dark matter,

    Hyeonmo Koo, Dongsu Bak, Inkyu Park, Sungwook E. Hong, and Jae-Weon Lee, “Final parsec problem of black hole mergers and ultralight dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B856, 138908 (2024), arXiv:2311.03412 [astro- ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Supermassive black hole binaries in ultralight dark matter,

    Benjamin C. Bromley, Pearl Sandick, and Barmak Shams Es Haghi, “Supermassive black hole binaries in ultralight dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D110, 023517 (2024), arXiv:2311.18013 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    Mass transfer and boson cloud depletion in a binary black hole system,

    Yao Guo, Wenjie Zhong, Yiqiu Ma, and Daiqin Su, “Mass transfer and boson cloud depletion in a binary black hole system,” Phys. Rev. D109, 104046 (2024), arXiv:2309.07790 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Effect of Wave Dark Matter on Equal Mass Black Hole Mergers,

    Josu C. Aurrekoetxea, Katy Clough, Jamie Bamber, and Pedro G. Ferreira, “Effect of Wave Dark Matter on Equal Mass Black Hole Mergers,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 211401 (2024), arXiv:2311.18156 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Self-interacting scalar dark matter around binary black holes,

    Josu C. Aurrekoetxea, James Marsden, Katy Clough, and Pedro G. Ferreira, “Self-interacting scalar dark matter around binary black holes,” Phys. Rev. D110, 083011 (2024), arXiv:2409.01937 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    Superra- diant clouds may be relevant for close compact ob- ject binaries,

    Ao Guo, Jun Zhang, and Huan Yang, “Superra- diant clouds may be relevant for close compact ob- ject binaries,” Phys. Rev. D110, 023022 (2024), arXiv:2401.15003 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Gravitational Wave Duet by Resonating Binary Black Holes with Axion-Like Particles,

    Jeong Han Kim and Xing-Yu Yang, “Gravitational Wave Duet by Resonating Binary Black Holes with Axion-Like Particles,” (2024), arXiv:2407.14604 [astro- ph.CO]

    arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Scattering of wave dark matter by supermassive black holes,

    Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, “Scattering of wave dark matter by supermassive black holes,” Phys. Rev. D111, 063075 (2025), arXiv:2501.00090 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Supermassive binaries in ultralight dark matter solitons,

    Russell Boey, Emily Kendall, Yourong Wang, and Richard Easther, “Supermassive binaries in ultralight dark matter solitons,” Phys. Rev. D112, 023510 (2025), arXiv:2504.16348 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Exploring Ultralight Dark Matter Self- Coupling via the Gravitational Wave Background,

    Pratick Sarkar, “Exploring Ultralight Dark Matter Self- Coupling via the Gravitational Wave Background,” (2025), arXiv:2504.19505 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    DiscoveringµHz gravitational waves and ultra-light dark matter with binary resonances,

    Joshua W. Foster, Diego Blas, Adrien Bourgoin, Aure- lien Hees, M ´ ıriam Herrero-Valea, Alexander C. Jenkins, and Xiao Xue, “DiscoveringµHz gravitational waves and ultra-light dark matter with binary resonances,” (2025), arXiv:2504.15334 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Gravitational waves of quasi-circular, inspiral- ing black hole binaries in an ultralight vector dark- matter environment,

    Tom´ as Ferreira Chase, Diana L´ opez Nacir, and Nicol´ as Yunes, “Gravitational waves of quasi-circular, inspiral- ing black hole binaries in an ultralight vector dark- matter environment,” (2025), arXiv:2505.21383 [astro- ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    Relativistic scalar dark matter drag forces on a black hole binary,

    Shuo Xin and Elias R. Most, “Relativistic scalar dark matter drag forces on a black hole binary,” (2025), arXiv:2507.18934 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Common Envelope Evolution of Ultralight Boson Clouds,

    Ao Guo, Qi-Yan Zhang, Huan Yang, and Jun Zhang, “Common Envelope Evolution of Ultralight Boson Clouds,” (2025), arXiv:2508.18738 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Probing Ultralight Bosons with Binary Black Holes,

    Daniel Baumann, Horng Sheng Chia, and Rafael A. Porto, “Probing Ultralight Bosons with Binary Black Holes,” Phys. Rev. D99, 044001 (2019), arXiv:1804.03208 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  48. [48]

    Gravitational floating or- bits around hairy black holes,

    Jun Zhang and Huan Yang, “Gravitational floating or- bits around hairy black holes,” Phys. Rev. D99, 064018 (2019), arXiv:1808.02905 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  49. [49]

    Dynamic Signatures of Black Hole Binaries with Superradiant Clouds,

    Jun Zhang and Huan Yang, “Dynamic Signatures of Black Hole Binaries with Superradiant Clouds,” Phys. Rev. D101, 043020 (2020), arXiv:1907.13582 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Ultralight boson cloud depletion in binary systems,

    Emanuele Berti, Richard Brito, Caio F. B. Macedo, Guilherme Raposo, and Joao Luis Rosa, “Ultralight boson cloud depletion in binary systems,” Phys. Rev. D 99, 104039 (2019), arXiv:1904.03131 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  51. [51]

    Gravitational Collider Physics,

    Daniel Baumann, Horng Sheng Chia, Rafael A. Porto, and John Stout, “Gravitational Collider Physics,” Phys. Rev. D101, 083019 (2020), arXiv:1912.04932 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    Gravita- tional Collider Physics via Pulsar-Black Hole Binaries,

    Qianhang Ding, Xi Tong, and Yi Wang, “Gravita- tional Collider Physics via Pulsar-Black Hole Binaries,” Astrophys. J.908, 78 (2021), arXiv:2009.11106 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  53. [53]

    Axion clouds may survive the perturbative tidal interaction over the early inspiral phase of black hole binaries,

    Takuya Takahashi and Takahiro Tanaka, “Axion clouds may survive the perturbative tidal interaction over the early inspiral phase of black hole binaries,” JCAP10, 031 (2021), arXiv:2106.08836 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  54. [54]

    Gravitational Collider Physics via Pulsar–Black Hole Binaries II: Fine and Hyperfine Structures Are Favored,

    Xi Tong, Yi Wang, and Hui-Yu Zhu, “Gravitational Collider Physics via Pulsar–Black Hole Binaries II: Fine and Hyperfine Structures Are Favored,” Astrophys. J. 924, 99 (2022), arXiv:2106.13484 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  55. [55]

    Tidal deforma- bility of dressed black holes and tests of ultralight bosons in extended mass ranges,

    Valerio De Luca and Paolo Pani, “Tidal deforma- bility of dressed black holes and tests of ultralight bosons in extended mass ranges,” JCAP08, 032 (2021), arXiv:2106.14428 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  56. [56]

    Prob- ing Ultralight Bosons with Compact Eccentric Bina- ries,

    Boye Su, Zhong-Zhi Xianyu, and Xingyu Zhang, “Prob- ing Ultralight Bosons with Compact Eccentric Bina- ries,” Astrophys. J.923, 114 (2021), arXiv:2107.13527 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    Axion cloud evaporation during inspiral of 8 black hole binaries: The effects of backreaction and ra- diation,

    Takuya Takahashi, Hidetoshi Omiya, and Takahiro Tanaka, “Axion cloud evaporation during inspiral of 8 black hole binaries: The effects of backreaction and ra- diation,” PTEP2022, 043E01 (2022), arXiv:2112.05774 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Ionization of gravi- tational atoms,

    Daniel Baumann, Gianfranco Bertone, John Stout, and Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, “Ionization of gravi- tational atoms,” Phys. Rev. D105, 115036 (2022), arXiv:2112.14777 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    Termination of superradiance from a binary companion,

    Xi Tong, Yi Wang, and Hui-Yu Zhu, “Termination of superradiance from a binary companion,” Phys. Rev. D 106, 043002 (2022), arXiv:2205.10527 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    Sharp Signals of Boson Clouds in Black Hole Binary Inspirals,

    Daniel Baumann, Gianfranco Bertone, John Stout, and Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, “Sharp Signals of Boson Clouds in Black Hole Binary Inspirals,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 221102 (2022), arXiv:2206.01212 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  61. [61]

    Distinguishing environmental effects on bi- nary black hole gravitational waveforms,

    Philippa S. Cole, Gianfranco Bertone, Adam Coogan, Daniele Gaggero, Theophanes Karydas, Bradley J. Ka- vanagh, Thomas F. M. Spieksma, and Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, “Distinguishing environmental effects on bi- nary black hole gravitational waveforms,” Nature As- tron.7, 943–950 (2023), arXiv:2211.01362 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2023

  62. [62]

    Adiabatically compressed wave dark matter halo and intermediate-mass-ratio inspirals,

    Hyungjin Kim, Alessandro Lenoci, Isak Stomberg, and Xiao Xue, “Adiabatically compressed wave dark matter halo and intermediate-mass-ratio inspirals,” Phys. Rev. D107, 083005 (2023), arXiv:2212.07528 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    Evolution of binary systems accompanying ax- ion clouds in extreme mass ratio inspirals,

    Takuya Takahashi, Hidetoshi Omiya, and Takahiro Tanaka, “Evolution of binary systems accompanying ax- ion clouds in extreme mass ratio inspirals,” Phys. Rev. D107, 103020 (2023), arXiv:2301.13213 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    Dynamical friction in gravita- tional atoms,

    Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, Thomas F. M. Spieksma, and Gianfranco Bertone, “Dynamical friction in gravita- tional atoms,” JCAP07, 070 (2023), arXiv:2305.15460 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    Signatures of ultralight bosons in compact binary inspiral and outspiral,

    Yan Cao and Yong Tang, “Signatures of ultralight bosons in compact binary inspiral and outspiral,” Phys. Rev. D108, 123017 (2023), arXiv:2307.05181 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  66. [66]

    Extreme mass- ratio inspirals into black holes surrounded by scalar clouds,

    Richard Brito and Shreya Shah, “Extreme mass- ratio inspirals into black holes surrounded by scalar clouds,” Phys. Rev. D108, 084019 (2023), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 110, 109902 (2024)], arXiv:2307.16093 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  67. [67]

    Modulating binary dynamics via the termination of black hole superradiance,

    Kaiyuan Fan, Xi Tong, Yi Wang, and Hui-Yu Zhu, “Modulating binary dynamics via the termination of black hole superradiance,” Phys. Rev. D109, 024059 (2024), arXiv:2311.17013 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  68. [68]

    Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals in Ultralight Dark Matter,

    Francisco Duque, Caio F. B. Macedo, Rodrigo Vicente, and Vitor Cardoso, “Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals in Ultralight Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 121404 (2024), arXiv:2312.06767 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  69. [69]

    Signatures of Ultralight Bosons in the Orbital Eccentricity of Binary Black Holes,

    Mateja Boˇ skovi´ c, Matthias Koschnitzke, and Rafael A. Porto, “Signatures of Ultralight Bosons in the Orbital Eccentricity of Binary Black Holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 121401 (2024), arXiv:2403.02415 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    Resonant history of gravita- tional atoms in black hole binaries,

    Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, Thomas F. M. Spieksma, and Gianfranco Bertone, “Resonant history of gravita- tional atoms in black hole binaries,” Phys. Rev. D110, 064048 (2024), arXiv:2403.03147 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    Legacy of Boson Clouds on Black Hole Binaries,

    Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, Thomas F. M. Spieksma, and Gianfranco Bertone, “Legacy of Boson Clouds on Black Hole Binaries,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 121402 (2024), arXiv:2407.12908 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  72. [72]

    Survival of the Fittest: Testing Superradiance Ter- mination with Simulated Binary Black Hole Statistics,

    Hui-Yu Zhu, Xi Tong, Giorgio Manzoni, and Yanjiao Ma, “Survival of the Fittest: Testing Superradiance Ter- mination with Simulated Binary Black Hole Statistics,” Astrophys. J.981, 165 (2025), arXiv:2409.14159 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    Tidal Love numbers of gravitational atoms,

    Ricardo Arana, Richard Brito, and Gon¸ calo Castro, “Tidal Love numbers of gravitational atoms,” Phys. Rev. D111, 044013 (2025), arXiv:2410.00968 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Probing vector gravitational atoms with eccentric in- termediate mass-ratio inspirals,

    Yan Cao, Ya-Ze Cheng, Gen-Liang Li, and Yong Tang, “Probing vector gravitational atoms with eccentric in- termediate mass-ratio inspirals,” Phys. Rev. D111, 083011 (2025), arXiv:2411.17247 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    Gravitational Waves from Superradiant Cloud Level Transition,

    Si-Tong Peng and Jun Zhang, “Gravitational Waves from Superradiant Cloud Level Transition,” (2025), arXiv:2504.00728 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  76. [76]

    Gravitational Waves from Resonant Transitions of Tidally Perturbed Gravitational Atoms,

    Antonios Kyriazis and Fengwei Yang, “Gravitational Waves from Resonant Transitions of Tidally Perturbed Gravitational Atoms,” (2025), arXiv:2503.18121 [hep- ph]

    arXiv 2025

  77. [77]

    Probing Bo- son Clouds with Supermassive Black Hole Binaries,

    Ximeng Li, Jing Ren, and Xi-Li Zhang, “Probing Bo- son Clouds with Supermassive Black Hole Binaries,” (2025), arXiv:2505.02866 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  78. [78]

    Smooth binary evolu- tion from wide resonances in boson clouds,

    Giovanni Maria Tomaselli, “Smooth binary evolu- tion from wide resonances in boson clouds,” (2025), arXiv:2507.15110 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    Self-Gravity in Superradiance Clouds: Implications for Binary Dynamics and Observational Prospects,

    Hyungjin Kim and Alessandro Lenoci, “Self-Gravity in Superradiance Clouds: Implications for Binary Dynamics and Observational Prospects,” (2025), arXiv:2508.08367 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  80. [80]

    Dark Matter-Independent Orbital Decay Bounds on Ultralight Bosons from OJ287,

    Qianhang Ding, Minxi He, Volodymyr Takhistov, and Hui-Yu Zhu, “Dark Matter-Independent Orbital Decay Bounds on Ultralight Bosons from OJ287,” (2025), arXiv:2505.09696 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.