pith. machine review for the scientific record.
sign in

arxiv: 2510.11861 · v2 · submitted 2025-10-13 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE

Impact of facility timing and coordination for next-generation gravitational-wave detectors

Ssohrab Borhanian , Arianna Renzini , Philippa S. Cole , Costantino Pacilio , Michele Mancarella , Davide Gerosa This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 07:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HE
keywords gravitational-wave detectorsdetector networkssource localizationtiming delaysEinstein TelescopeCosmic ExplorerFisher informationmulti-messenger astronomy
0
0 comments X

The pith

Delays in one next-generation gravitational-wave detector impact localization metrics as severely as network-wide interruptions in two-facility setups, while sensitivity metrics like signal-to-noise ratio remain largely unaffected.

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

The paper studies how long-term delays in building or operating next-generation detectors such as the Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer affect the overall performance of detector networks. Simulations using the Fisher information formalism on large populations of binary black holes, binary neutron stars, and primordial black-hole binaries show that metrics based purely on signal strength hold up well despite timing mismatches. Localization performance, however, depends strongly on having multiple detectors active at the same time, so a delay in one facility effectively interrupts the network's ability to pinpoint sources. The work also checks how a concurrent current-generation detector like LIGO India can offset these localization losses and improve prospects for multi-messenger events and stochastic background searches.

Core claim

For networks consisting of two next-generation facilities, delays in one detector behave like network-wide interruptions for the localization metrics, whereas purely sensitivity-driven metrics such as the signal-to-noise ratio are not strongly affected by delays between facilities. This pattern holds across fiducial populations of binary black holes, binary neutron stars, and primordial black-hole binaries when observation times needed to meet scientific targets are mapped via bootstrapping of simulated events.

What carries the argument

Fisher information formalism applied to simulated populations of binary mergers to estimate parameter uncertainties and the observation times required to reach scientific targets for sensitivity and localization metrics under different network timing scenarios.

If this is right

  • Localization of gravitational-wave sources requires simultaneous operation of at least two next-generation detectors rather than staggered schedules.
  • Adding a supporting current-generation detector such as LIGO India substantially reduces the localization penalties caused by delays in next-generation facilities.
  • Multi-messenger science and searches for stochastic gravitational-wave backgrounds gain from coordinated facility timelines.
  • Sensitivity goals can be pursued independently of precise coordination, but localization goals cannot.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Construction schedules for next-generation facilities may need to be aligned internationally as tightly as their individual sensitivity targets are optimized.
  • Networks with three or more next-generation detectors could show different sensitivity to staggered start times than the two-detector case examined here.
  • The same timing considerations could apply to other science targets such as tests of general relativity that rely on precise sky localization.

Load-bearing premise

The Fisher information formalism accurately captures the expected parameter uncertainties and observation times for the chosen fiducial populations of binary black holes, binary neutron stars, and primordial black-hole binaries.

What would settle it

Direct comparison of predicted localization uncertainties from the simulations against measured localization errors in actual gravitational-wave data from a two next-generation detector network where one facility begins observations several years after the other.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.11861 by Arianna Renzini, Costantino Pacilio, Davide Gerosa, Michele Mancarella, Philippa S. Cole, Ssohrab Borhanian.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Detector sensitivity curves used in this study, see Sec. 2.3. The A+ and A# curves are used for the LIGO-India detector I, ET-10 and ET-15 for ET configurations ET-△ and ET-2L, respectively, and CE-40 for the CE facility CE. 3. Results 3.1. Next-generation timing To investigate the impact of timing and coordination of XG detector facilities, particularly the potential for delays in observation campaigns, … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison of the expected observation times Tobs to reach a target of Nth “ 10 BBH (top) and BNS (bottom) signals satisfying three different thresholds for SNR ρth, sky area Ωth, relative luminosity distance error p∆DL{DLqth, comoving error volume Vth, post-merger SNR ρpm,th, early-warning SNR ρew,th, and sky area Ωew,th. For each of these, three thresholds are considered and indicated with different mark… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Impact of the addition of LIGO-India, either in I+ or I# configuration, to five XG detectors and networks, ET-△, ET-2L, CE, ET-△ ` CE, ET-2L ` CE, on the expected observation times Tobs to reach a target of Nth “ 10 BBH (left) and BNS (right) signals satisfying three different thresholds for SNR ρth, sky area Ωth, relative luminosity distance error p∆DL{DLqth, or comoving error volume Vth in addition to po… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the expected observation times Tobs to reach a target of Nth “ 1 PBH signal satisfying three different thresholds for the lower redshift error bound ∆z_,th P t30, 40, 50u at two values for the PBH-formation suppression factor fsup P t10´3 , 1u when observed by the three base XG facility configurations, ET-△ (right), ET-2L (left), CE (both), and two networks, ET-△ ` CE, ET-2L ` CE, combining t… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Power-law integrated (PI) curves for different XG networks, always considering a first set of detectors are online followed by a second detector with a delay of 3N months: the ET-2L detectors, followed by the CE detector (top left); the ET-△ detector, followed by the CE detector (top right); a single ET-L detector and the I+ detector, followed by a second ET-L (bottom left); the CE detector and the I+ dete… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

While the Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer proposals for next-generation, ground-based detectors promise vastly improved sensitivities to gravitational-wave signals, only joint observations are expected to enable the full scientific potential of these facilities, making timing and coordination between the efforts crucial to avoid missed opportunities. This study investigates the impact of long-term delays on the scientific capabilities of next-generation detector networks. We use the Fisher information formalism to simulate the performance of a set of detector networks for large, fiducial populations of binary black holes, binary neutron stars, and primordial black-hole binaries. Bootstrapping the simulated populations, we map the expected observation times required to reach a number of observations fulfilling scientific targets for key sensitivity and localization metrics across various network configurations. We also investigate the sensitivity to stochastic backgrounds. We find that purely sensitivity-driven metrics such as the signal-to-noise ratio are not strongly affected by delays between facilities. This is contrasted by the localization metrics, which are very sensitive to the number of detectors in the network and, by extension, to delayed observation campaigns for a detector. Effectively, delays in one detector behave like network-wide interruptions for the localization metrics for networks consisting of two next-generation facilities. We examine the impact of a supporting, current-generation detector such as LIGO India operating concurrently with next-generation facilities and find such an addition will greatly mitigate the negative effects of delays for localization metrics, with important consequences on multi-messenger science and stochastic searches.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates the effects of long-term delays in the operation of next-generation gravitational-wave detectors (Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer) on scientific performance using Fisher information formalism applied to fiducial populations of binary black holes, binary neutron stars, and primordial black hole binaries. It finds that sensitivity metrics like signal-to-noise ratio are minimally affected by delays, whereas localization metrics are highly sensitive, such that a delay in one detector acts similarly to a network-wide interruption for two-facility networks. The addition of a supporting detector like LIGO India is shown to mitigate these effects, with implications for multi-messenger astronomy and stochastic background searches.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold, this work provides actionable insights for the coordination of next-generation detector projects, emphasizing the importance of overlapping observation periods to achieve localization and multi-messenger science goals. The use of large-scale forward simulations with bootstrapping on fiducial populations and explicit consideration of stochastic backgrounds strengthens the planning recommendations.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2] §4.2 (Localization metrics and bootstrapping): The headline equivalence between single-facility delays and network-wide interruptions for localization thresholds is obtained by counting events that meet localization criteria under Fisher-matrix uncertainties. This count includes the single-NG-detector regime, where the approximation is least reliable because the timing baseline is absent, network SNR is lower, and posteriors are known to be non-Gaussian. A direct comparison of Fisher uncertainties against full likelihood sampling for a representative subset of events in the single-detector configuration is required to support the central claim.
  2. [§3.1] §3.1 (Fiducial populations): The quantitative mapping of observation times to scientific targets for localization depends on the specific mass, spin, and redshift distributions of the BBH, BNS, and PBH populations. These assumptions are stated only at a high level; without explicit parameter values or robustness checks against variations, the bootstrapped results for delayed networks cannot be fully assessed.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §2] The abstract and §2 should explicitly state the noise curves and frequency bands adopted for each detector configuration to allow reproduction of the SNR and Fisher calculations.
  2. [Figure captions] Figure captions for the bootstrapped observation-time plots would benefit from a brief note on the number of resamples used and the percentile range shown.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us identify areas for clarification and improvement. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (Localization metrics and bootstrapping): The headline equivalence between single-facility delays and network-wide interruptions for localization thresholds is obtained by counting events that meet localization criteria under Fisher-matrix uncertainties. This count includes the single-NG-detector regime, where the approximation is least reliable because the timing baseline is absent, network SNR is lower, and posteriors are known to be non-Gaussian. A direct comparison of Fisher uncertainties against full likelihood sampling for a representative subset of events in the single-detector configuration is required to support the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that the Fisher-matrix approximation is known to be less accurate in the single next-generation detector regime, where the absence of a timing baseline and lower network SNR can produce non-Gaussian posteriors. Our central result—that delays in one facility affect localization metrics similarly to a network-wide interruption—is nevertheless a population-level statement driven primarily by the change in network geometry and the number of events that cross a fixed localization threshold. We will revise §4.2 to include an explicit discussion of the limitations of the Fisher formalism in this regime, together with references to existing validation studies. A direct comparison against full likelihood sampling for a representative subset would be a valuable addition but requires substantial additional computational resources that lie outside the scope of the present work; we therefore treat this as a partial revision by strengthening the caveats rather than performing the sampling. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§3.1] §3.1 (Fiducial populations): The quantitative mapping of observation times to scientific targets for localization depends on the specific mass, spin, and redshift distributions of the BBH, BNS, and PBH populations. These assumptions are stated only at a high level; without explicit parameter values or robustness checks against variations, the bootstrapped results for delayed networks cannot be fully assessed.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. In the revised manuscript we will expand §3.1 to list the explicit functional forms and parameter values adopted for the mass, spin, and redshift distributions of the three fiducial populations. We will also add a short robustness subsection that varies the dominant parameters (e.g., the BBH mass power-law index and the redshift evolution slope) and shows that the reported trends in observation time required to meet localization targets remain qualitatively unchanged. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper conducts forward simulations of fiducial BBH, BNS, and PBH populations using the Fisher information matrix to compute parameter uncertainties and observation times under different network configurations with and without delays. Bootstrapping is then applied to these simulated event counts to determine when localization and sensitivity targets are reached. No parameters are fitted to the target metrics themselves, no self-citations are invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and the core equivalence (delays in one detector acting like network interruptions for localization) emerges directly from comparing the simulated counts across configurations rather than by definitional reduction or renaming of prior results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard gravitational-wave data analysis assumptions and simulated populations rather than new postulates. No invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • fiducial binary population parameters
    Rates, mass distributions, and redshift evolution for BBH, BNS, and PBH binaries are chosen to represent expected future detections.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Fisher information matrix provides a reliable approximation to the covariance matrix of parameter estimates for gravitational-wave signals from compact binaries.
    Invoked to simulate performance metrics for the detector networks.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5808 in / 1179 out tokens · 35582 ms · 2026-05-18T07:09:04.296280+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    We use the Fisher information formalism to simulate the performance of a set of detector networks for large, fiducial populations of binary black holes, binary neutron stars, and primordial black-hole binaries. Bootstrapping the simulated populations, we map the expected observation times required to reach a number of observations fulfilling scientific targets for key sensitivity and localization metrics

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    The localization metrics, which are very sensitive to the number of detectors in the network and, by extension, to delayed observation campaigns for a detector. Effectively, delays in one detector behave like network-wide interruptions for the localization metrics for networks consisting of two next-generation facilities.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Not too close! Evaluating the impact of the baseline on the localization of binary black holes by next-generation gravitational-wave detectors

    gr-qc 2026-04 conditional novelty 4.0

    Baselines of 8-11 ms light travel time for two CE detectors provide a reasonable compromise for BBH sky localization, with third detectors eliminating multimodality for most or all events.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 25 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    C. S. Unnikrishnan,IndIGO and LIGO-India: Scope and plans for gravitational wave research and precision metrology in India,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D22(2013) 1341010 [1510.06059]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  2. [2]

    LIGO Scientific, VirgoCollaboration,GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs,Phys. Rev. X9(2019) 031040 [1811.12907]. [6]LIGO Scientific, VirgoCollaboration,GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  3. [3]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo, KAGRACollaboration,GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run,Phys. Rev. X13(2023) 041039 [2111.03606]. [8]LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRACollaboration,GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog with Observations from the First Part of the Fourth L...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Fritschel, K

    P. Fritschel, K. Kuns, J. Driggers, A. Effler, B. Lantz, D. Ottaway et al.,Report from the lsc post-o5 study group,Tech. Rep. LIGO-T2200287(2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

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

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

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    The Science of the Einstein Telescope

    A. Abac et al.,The Science of the Einstein Telescope,Tech. Rep. ET-0036C-25(2025) [2503.12263]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

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

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Lis- tening to the Universe with next generation ground- based gravitational-wave detectors,

    S. Borhanian and B. S. Sathyaprakash,Listening to the Universe with next generation ground-based gravitational-wave detectors,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 083040 [2202.11048]

    work page arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Iacovelli, M

    F. Iacovelli, M. Mancarella, S. Foffa and M. Maggiore,Forecasting the Detection Capabilities of Third-generation Gravitational-wave Detectors Using GWFAST,Astrophys. J.941(2022) 208 [2207.02771]

    work page arXiv 2022

  10. [10]

    Ronchini, M

    S. Ronchini, M. Branchesi, G. Oganesyan, B. Banerjee, U. Dupletsa, G. Ghirlanda et al., Perspectives for multimessenger astronomy with the next generation of gravitational-wave detectors and high-energy satellites,Astron. Astrophys.665(2022) A97 [2204.01746]

    work page arXiv 2022

  11. [11]

    Gupta, S

    I. Gupta, S. Borhanian, A. Dhani, D. Chattopadhyay, R. Kashyap, V. A. Villar et al.,Neutron star-black hole mergers in next generation gravitational-wave observatories,Phys. Rev. D 107(2023) 124007 [2301.08763]

    work page arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Science with the Einstein Telescope: a comparison of different designs

    M. Branchesi et al.,Science with the Einstein Telescope: a comparison of different designs,J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.07(2023) 068 [2303.15923]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  13. [13]

    A Horizon Study for Cosmic Explorer: Science, Observatories, and Community

    M. Evans et al.,A Horizon Study for Cosmic Explorer: Science, Observatories, and Community,Tech. Rep. CE-P2100003(2021) [2109.09882]. Impact of facility timing and coordination for XG GW detectors26

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  14. [14]

    Evans et al

    M. Evans et al.,Cosmic Explorer: A Submission to the NSF MPSAC ngGW Subcommittee, [2306.13745]

    work page arXiv

  15. [15]

    Characterization of binary black holes by heterogeneous gravitational-wave networks

    S. Vitale and C. Whittle,Characterization of binary black holes by heterogeneous gravitational-wave networks,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 024029 [1804.07866]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  16. [16]

    Pandey, I

    S. Pandey, I. Gupta, K. Chandra and B. S. Sathyaprakash,The Critical Role of LIGO-India in the Era of Next-generation Observatories,Astrophys. J. Lett.985(2025) L17 [2411.10349]. [23]PlanckCollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys. 641(2020) A6 [1807.06209]

    work page arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Borhanian,GWBENCH: a novel Fisher information package for gravitational-wave benchmarking,Class

    S. Borhanian,GWBENCH: a novel Fisher information package for gravitational-wave benchmarking,Class. Quantum Grav.38(2021) 175014 [2010.15202]

    work page arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Gravitational Waves from Mergin Compact Binaries: How Accurately Can One Extract the Binary's Parameters from the Inspiral Waveform?

    C. Cutler and E. E. Flanagan,Gravitational waves from merging compact binaries: How accurately can one extract the binary’s parameters from the inspiral wave form?,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 2658 [gr-qc/9402014]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  19. [19]

    Gravitational waves from inspiralling compact binaries: Parameter estimation using second-post-Newtonian waveforms

    E. Poisson and C. M. Will,Gravitational waves from inspiraling compact binaries: Parameter estimation using second postNewtonian wave forms,Phys. Rev. D52(1995) 848 [gr-qc/9502040]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  20. [20]

    Gravitational waves from coalescing binaries: detection strategies and Monte Carlo estimation of parameters

    R. Balasubramanian, B. S. Sathyaprakash and S. V. Dhurandhar,Gravitational waves from coalescing binaries: Detection strategies and Monte Carlo estimation of parameters,Phys. Rev. D53(1996) 3033 [gr-qc/9508011]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  21. [21]

    De Renzis, F

    V. De Renzis, F. Iacovelli, D. Gerosa, M. Mancarella and C. Pacilio,Forecasting the population properties of merging black holes,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 044048 [2410.17325]

    work page arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Use and Abuse of the Fisher Information Matrix in the Assessment of Gravitational-Wave Parameter-Estimation Prospects

    M. Vallisneri,Use and abuse of the Fisher information matrix in the assessment of gravitational-wave parameter-estimation prospects,Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 042001 [gr-qc/0703086]. [30]LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRACollaboration,GWTC-4.0: Population Properties of Merging Compact Binaries, [2508.18083]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  23. [23]

    Ivezić, A

    Ž. Ivezić, A. J. Connolly, J. T. VanderPlas and A. Gray,Statistics, Data Mining, and Machine Learning in Astronomy. A Practical Python Guide for the Analysis of Survey Data. Princeton, 2020, 10.1515/9780691197050

    work page doi:10.1515/9780691197050 2020

  24. [24]

    Sensitivity curves for searches for gravitational-wave backgrounds

    E. Thrane and J. D. Romano,Sensitivity curves for searches for gravitational-wave backgrounds,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 124032 [1310.5300]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  25. [25]

    J. D. Romano and N. J. Cornish,Detection methods for stochastic gravitational-wave backgrounds: a unified treatment,Living Rev. Relativ.20(2017) 2 [1608.06889]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    García-Quirós, M

    C. García-Quirós, M. Colleoni, S. Husa, H. Estellés, G. Pratten, A. Ramos-Buades et al., Multimode frequency-domain model for the gravitational wave signal from nonprecessing black-hole binaries,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 064002 [2001.10914]

    work page arXiv 2020

  27. [27]

    García-Quirós, S

    C. García-Quirós, S. Husa, M. Mateu-Lucena and A. Borchers,Accelerating the evaluation of inspiral–merger–ringdown waveforms with adapted grids,Class. Quantum Grav.38(2021) 015006 [2001.10897]

    work page arXiv 2021

  28. [28]

    D. P. Mihaylov, S. Ossokine, A. Buonanno and A. Ghosh,Fast post-adiabatic waveforms in the time domain: Applications to compact binary coalescences in LIGO and Virgo,Phys. Rev. D 104(2021) 124087 [2105.06983]

    work page arXiv 2021

  29. [29]

    K. K. Y. Ng, S. Vitale, W. M. Farr and C. L. Rodriguez,Probing multiple populations of compact binaries with third-generation gravitational-wave detectors,Astrophys. J. Lett.913 (2021) L5 [2012.09876]

    work page arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    2014, ARA&A, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    P. Madau and M. Dickinson,Cosmic Star Formation History,Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 52(2014) 415 [1403.0007]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    LIGO Scientific, VirgoCollaboration,Population Properties of Compact Objects from the Impact of facility timing and coordination for XG GW detectors27 Second LIGO-Virgo Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog,Astrophys. J. Lett.913(2021) L7 [2010.14533]

    work page arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    A unified equation of state of dense matter and neutron star structure

    F. Douchin and P. Haensel,A unified equation of state of dense matter and neutron star structure,Astron. Astrophys.380(2001) 151 [astro-ph/0111092]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  33. [33]

    Bilby: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy

    G. Ashton et al.,BILBY: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy,Astrophys. J. Supp. S.241(2019) 27 [1811.02042]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  34. [34]

    A. M. Green,Primordial black holes as a dark matter candidate - a brief overview,Nucl. Phys. B1003(2024) 116494 [2402.15211]

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    Escrivà, F

    A. Escrivà, F. Kuhnel and Y. Tada,Primordial Black Holes, inBlack Holes in the Era of Gravitational-Wave Astronomy, Elsevier, (11, 2022), [2211.05767], DOI

    work page arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    Suyama and C.-M

    T. Suyama and C.-M. Yoo,Overall Picture: A Beginner’s Guide to Primordial Black Hole Formation, inPrimordial Black Holes, Springer, (2025), DOI

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Andrés-Carcasona, A

    M. Andrés-Carcasona, A. J. Iovino, V. Vaskonen, H. Veermäe, M. Martínez, O. Pujolàs et al., Constraints on primordial black holes from LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA O3 events,Phys. Rev. D 110(2024) 023040 [2405.05732]

    work page arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    B. Carr, S. Clesse, J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Hawkins and F. Kuhnel,Observational evidence for primordial black holes: A positivist perspective,Phys. Rep.1054(2024) 1 [2306.03903]

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    P. S. Cole and C. T. Byrnes,Extreme scenarios: the tightest possible constraints on the power spectrum due to primordial black holes,J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02(2018) 019 [1706.10288]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  40. [40]

    Chen and A

    Z.-C. Chen and A. Hall,Confronting Primordial Black Holes with LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA and the Einstein Telescope, inPrimordial Black Holes, Springer, (2025), [2402.03934], DOI

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Iacovelli and M

    F. Iacovelli and M. Maggiore,Gravitational-Wave Observations and Primordial Black Holes, in Primordial Black Holes, Springer, (2025), [2407.21442], DOI

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Formation and Evolution of Primordial Black Hole Binaries in the Early Universe

    M. Raidal, C. Spethmann, V. Vaskonen and H. Veermäe,Formation and Evolution of Primordial Black Hole Binaries in the Early Universe,J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02 (2019) 018 [1812.01930]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  43. [43]

    Gravitational Waves from Primordial Black Hole Mergers

    M. Raidal, V. Vaskonen and H. Veermäe,Gravitational Waves from Primordial Black Hole Mergers,J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.09(2017) 037 [1707.01480]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  44. [44]

    Mukherjee and J

    S. Mukherjee and J. Silk,Can we distinguish astrophysical from primordial black holes via the stochastic gravitational wave background?,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.506(2021) 3977 [2105.11139]

    work page arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    Mukherjee, M

    S. Mukherjee, M. S. P. Meinema and J. Silk,Prospects of discovering subsolar primordial black holes using the stochastic gravitational wave background from third-generation detectors, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.510(2022) 6218 [2107.02181]

    work page arXiv 2022

  46. [46]

    The astrophysical gravitational wave stochastic background

    T. Regimbau,The astrophysical gravitational wave stochastic background,Res. Astron. Astrophys.11(2011) 369 [1101.2762]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  47. [47]

    Callister, M

    T. Callister, M. Fishbach, D. Holz and W. Farr,Shouts and Murmurs: Combining Individual Gravitational-Wave Sources with the Stochastic Background to Measure the History of Binary Black Hole Mergers,Astrophys. J. Lett.896(2020) L32 [2003.12152]

    work page arXiv 2020

  48. [48]

    Regimbau,The Quest for the Astrophysical Gravitational-Wave Background with Terrestrial Detectors,Symmetry14(2022) 270

    T. Regimbau,The Quest for the Astrophysical Gravitational-Wave Background with Terrestrial Detectors,Symmetry14(2022) 270

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    A. I. Renzini and J. Golomb,Projections of the uncertainty on the compact binary population background using popstock,Astron. Astrophys.691(2024) A238 [2407.03742]

    work page arXiv 2024

  50. [50]

    Ebersold, T

    M. Ebersold, T. Regimbau and N. Christensen,Next-generation global gravitational-wave detector network: Impact of detector orientation on compact binary coalescence and stochastic gravitational-wave background searches,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 122006 [2408.06032]

    work page arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    E. S. Phinney,A Practical theorem on gravitational wave backgrounds, [astro-ph/0108028]. Impact of facility timing and coordination for XG GW detectors28

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  52. [52]

    apps.et-gw.eu/tds/?r=18213

    ET 10km noise curve. apps.et-gw.eu/tds/?r=18213

    work page

  53. [53]

    apps.et-gw.eu/tds/?r=18213

    ET 15km noise curve. apps.et-gw.eu/tds/?r=18213

    work page

  54. [54]

    dcc.cosmicexplorer.org/CE-T2000017-v7

    CE 40km noise curve. dcc.cosmicexplorer.org/CE-T2000017-v7

    work page

  55. [55]

    dcc.cosmicexplorer.org/public/0163/T2000007/005

    A+ noise curve. dcc.cosmicexplorer.org/public/0163/T2000007/005

    work page

  56. [56]

    dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T2300041

    A# noise curve. dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T2300041

    work page

  57. [57]

    Mancarella, F

    M. Mancarella, F. Iacovelli and D. Gerosa,Inferring, not just detecting: Metrics for high-redshift sources observed with third-generation gravitational-wave detectors,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) L101302 [2303.16323]

    work page arXiv 2023

  58. [58]

    K. K. Y. Ng, G. Franciolini, E. Berti, P. Pani, A. Riotto and S. Vitale,Constraining High-redshift Stellar-mass Primordial Black Holes with Next-generation Ground-based Gravitational-wave Detectors,Astrophys. J. Lett.933(2022) L41 [2204.11864]

    work page arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    Stasenko,Redshift evolution of primordial black hole merger rate,Phys

    V. Stasenko,Redshift evolution of primordial black hole merger rate,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 123546 [2403.11325]

    work page arXiv 2024

  60. [60]

    Detecting a stochastic background of gravitational radiation: Signal processing strategies and sensitivities

    B. Allen and J. D. Romano,Detecting a stochastic background of gravitational radiation: Signal processing strategies and sensitivities,Phys. Rev. D59(1999) 102001 [gr-qc/9710117]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  61. [61]

    A. I. Renzini et al.,pygwb: A Python-based Library for Gravitational-wave Background Searches,Astrophys. J.952(2023) 25 [2303.15696]

    work page arXiv 2023

  62. [62]

    Muratore, O

    M. Muratore, O. Hartwig, D. Vetrugno, S. Vitale and W. J. Weber,Effectiveness of null time-delay interferometry channels as instrument noise monitors in LISA,Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) 082004 [2207.02138]

    work page arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    Digging deeper: Observing primordial gravitational waves below the binary black hole produced stochastic background

    T. Regimbau, M. Evans, N. Christensen, E. Katsavounidis, B. Sathyaprakash and S. Vitale, Digging deeper: Observing primordial gravitational waves below the binary black hole produced stochastic background,Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) 151105 [1611.08943]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  64. [64]

    Sachdev, T

    S. Sachdev, T. Regimbau and B. S. Sathyaprakash,Subtracting compact binary foreground sources to reveal primordial gravitational-wave backgrounds,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 024051 [2002.05365]

    work page arXiv 2020

  65. [65]

    Martinovic, P

    K. Martinovic, P. M. Meyers, M. Sakellariadou and N. Christensen,Simultaneous estimation of astrophysical and cosmological stochastic gravitational-wave backgrounds with terrestrial detectors,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 043023 [2011.05697]

    work page arXiv 2021

  66. [66]

    Biscoveanu, C

    S. Biscoveanu, C. Talbot, E. Thrane and R. Smith,Measuring the primordial gravitational-wave background in the presence of astrophysical foregrounds,Phys. Rev. Lett. 125(2020) 241101 [2009.04418]

    work page arXiv 2020

  67. [67]

    B. Zhou, L. Reali, E. Berti, M. Çalışkan, C. Creque-Sarbinowski, M. Kamionkowski et al., Compact Binary Foreground Subtraction in Next-Generation Ground-Based Observatories, [2209.01221]

    work page arXiv

  68. [68]

    B. Zhou, L. Reali, E. Berti, M. Çalışkan, C. Creque-Sarbinowski, M. Kamionkowski et al., Subtracting compact binary foregrounds to search for subdominant gravitational-wave backgrounds in next-generation ground-based observatories,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 064040 [2209.01310]

    work page arXiv 2023

  69. [69]

    Zhong, B

    H. Zhong, B. Zhou, L. Reali, E. Berti and V. Mandic,Searching for cosmological stochastic backgrounds by notching out resolvable compact binary foregrounds with next-generation gravitational-wave detectors,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 064047 [2406.10757]

    work page arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    Belgacem, F

    E. Belgacem, F. Iacovelli, M. Maggiore, M. Mancarella and N. Muttoni,Confusion noise from astrophysical backgrounds at third-generation gravitational-wave detector networks, [2411.04029]

    work page arXiv

  71. [71]

    Zhong, L

    H. Zhong, L. Reali, B. Zhou, E. Berti and V. Mandic,Two-Step Procedure to Detect Cosmological Gravitational Wave Backgrounds with Next-Generation Terrestrial Gravitational-Wave Detectors,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 111401 [2501.17717]. Impact of facility timing and coordination for XG GW detectors29

    work page arXiv 2025

  72. [72]

    Giarda, A

    G. Giarda, A. I. Renzini, C. Pacilio and D. Gerosa,Accelerated inference of binary black-hole populations from the stochastic gravitational-wave background,Class. Quantum Grav. (in press)(2025) [2506.12572]

    work page arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    Bhagwat, C

    S. Bhagwat, C. Pacilio, P. Pani and M. Mapelli,Landscape of stellar-mass black-hole spectroscopy with third-generation gravitational-wave detectors,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 043019 [2304.02283]

    work page arXiv 2023

  74. [74]

    Black hole spectroscopy: from theory to experiment

    E. Berti et al.,Black hole spectroscopy: from theory to experiment, [2505.23895]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  75. [75]

    Maggiore, F

    M. Maggiore, F. Iacovelli, E. Belgacem, M. Mancarella and N. Muttoni,Comparison of global networks of third-generation gravitational-wave detectors, [2411.05754]

    work page arXiv