Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 5 cited by

Dense nuclear star clusters can turn a thousand-solar-mass black hole seed into a supermassive black hole in tens of millions of years, the authors argue — explaining JWST's Little Red Dots.

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 08:11 UTC pith:XE6ENE7V

load-bearing objection A usable semi-analytic NSC framework with testable LRD TDE/EMRI rate predictions, but the headline growth story leans on an unmeasured density and the reported rates are internally inconsistent. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2510.21709 v2 pith:XE6ENE7V submitted 2025-10-24 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COastro-ph.GAgr-qc

From nuclear star clusters to Little Red Dots: black hole growth, mergers, and tidal disruptions

Konstantinos Kritos , Joseph Silk This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COastro-ph.GAgr-qc
keywords nuclear star clusterslittle red dotssupermassive black hole growthtidal disruption eventsextreme-mass-ratio inspiralsintermediate-mass black holesJWSTaccretion
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.

The paper tries to show that the dense nuclear star clusters seen in the early universe are the nurseries where intermediate-mass black hole seeds rapidly grow into the supermassive black holes that power Little Red Dots at redshift 4–6. It builds a semi-analytical model of such a cluster with stars, stellar-mass black holes, a central seed, gas accretion, and loss-cone dynamics, and evolves it over time. The dramatic case — a cluster with central density 10^8 stars per cubic parsec — grows a 10^3 solar-mass seed to about 2×10^7 solar masses in a few tens of millions of years, mostly by swallowing stars and stellar-mass black holes. If right, the model makes concrete predictions: at z=4–6 there should be tens of tidal disruption events per year and a few extreme-mass-ratio inspirals per year, with a 10-to-1 ratio. It also offers a funnel-scattering explanation for why Little Red Dots are faint in X-rays.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a nuclear star cluster with central density ~10^8 solar masses per cubic parsec can grow a 10^3 solar-mass intermediate-mass black hole seed to ~2×10^7 solar masses in a few tens of millions of years via tidal disruptions, stellar-mass black hole captures, and episodic gas accretion — with about 80% of the final mass assembled from stars and black holes, not gas. This channel, the authors argue, produces the Little Red Dots seen at z~5. From the observed number density of LRDs, they predict tens of tidal disruption events per year and a few captured EMRIs per year at z=4–6, in a 10-to-1 ratio. They also attribute the low X-ray luminosity of LRDs to hard X-ra

What carries the argument

The model uses a two-mass broken power-law density profile for a nuclear star cluster: one population of stars, one more compact population of stellar-mass black holes, each with its own break radius. The authors analytically integrate the Jeans equation to get velocity dispersions, then treat the loss cone (the phase-space region that feeds the central black hole) to compute tidal disruption and gravitational-wave capture rates, add evaporation and gas accretion capped at a fixed Eddington ratio, and evolve the cluster radii under energy conservation. The loss cone is the key mechanism: it sets both the black hole growth rate and the predicted transient rates.

Load-bearing premise

The predictions rest on the unverified assumption that Little Red Dots contain dense, relaxed nuclear star clusters of about 10^6–10^7 solar masses, since the cluster mass sets the rate scale and is admitted to be an 'educated guess'.

What would settle it

A dedicated survey of tidal disruption events at redshift 4–6 that finds no events at the predicted rate of tens per year — or a high-resolution observation showing that Little Red Dots lack dense central stellar clusters — would falsify the model's growth channel and rate predictions.

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

If this is right

  • If LRDs host such clusters, a large fraction of their supermassive black hole mass is assembled by swallowing stars and stellar-mass black holes, not just gas accretion.
  • The model predicts an observer-frame rate of about 40 tidal disruption events per year and about 4 extreme-mass-ratio inspirals per year in redshift 4–6, with a fixed 10-to-1 ratio.
  • These rates are lower limits: the LRD number densities used are lower bounds, and lower-mass black holes are harder to observe.
  • The low X-ray luminosity of LRDs may be caused by scattering of hard X-rays in a thick accretion-disk funnel, producing high X-ray polarization and unassociated X-ray sources.
  • A residual population of stellar-mass black holes around the central supermassive black hole should lead to later black-hole mergers and micro-tidal disruptions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The model implies that the seed mass of the first black holes matters less than the density of the nuclear star cluster; even a 10^3 solar-mass seed can reach supermassive scales if the cluster is dense enough.
  • The 10-to-1 TDE-to-EMRI ratio is a sharp, testable prediction, but it hinges on the assumed cluster mass; a factor of 10 in cluster mass changes the rates by a factor of ~100, so the ratio (not the absolute rates) may be the more robust observable.
  • If LRDs continue to grow via tidal disruptions after their gas is expelled, then dormant LRDs should still be sources of TDEs and EMRIs — a prediction that could be checked by looking for variability and transients in inactive LRDs.
  • The funnel-scattering X-ray explanation suggests that high X-ray polarization, not just low X-ray flux, is a signature of Little Red Dots; if future X-ray polarimetry detects 10–20% polarization from these sources, it would support the super-Eddington scenario.

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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a semi-analytic two-component (stars + stellar-mass black holes) broken-power-law model for nuclear star clusters harboring a central seed black hole. It evolves the system under loss-cone tidal disruption events (TDEs), captured extreme-mass-ratio inspirals (EMRIs), stellar evaporation, two- and three-body BH binary formation, and episodic gas accretion. Two NSC examples are integrated: a 'typical' case with n1=n2=10^5 pc^-3 and an 'extremely massive and compact' case with n1=n2=10^8 pc^-3. In the extreme case a 10^3 Msun seed grows to ~2x10^7 Msun within a few tens of Myr, which the authors associate with the z~5 little red dot (LRD) population. Using LRD number densities from Matthee et al. (2024) and assuming the MBH-sigma relation at z~5, the paper derives source-frame and observer-frame TDE and captured-EMRI rates at z=4-6, reporting a TDE-to-EMRI ratio of about 10:1 and median cumulative rates of roughly tens to hundreds per year depending on the assumed NSC mass. The paper also discusses the low X-ray luminosity of LRDs via a Cygnus X-3-like funnel-scattering model. The authors are candid in Sec. 1 and Sec. 5 that the NSC input parameters are 'subjective' and that the NSC properties are the dominant source of uncertainty, but the abstract and Conclusions state the extreme-density growth and the rate predictions more assertively.

Significance. If the assumptions hold, the paper offers a self-contained dynamical channel for early SMBH assembly in dense NSCs and makes concrete, testable predictions for high-redshift TDEs and EMRIs, including a predicted rate ratio and possible LISA/UVEX signatures. The extension of analytic Jeans and loss-cone calculations to a two-mass broken-power-law cluster with gas accretion is useful and goes beyond existing single-mass treatments. The paper is also honest about the subjective input choices and flags the dominant uncertainty. However, the headline LRD-formation claim and the TDE/EMRI predictions rest on an unobserved, extreme NSC density (10^8 pc^-3) and on an assumed NSC mass scale (10^6 or 10^7 Msun) that changes the rates by two orders of magnitude. The internal rate summary is inconsistent between Sec. 5 and the Conclusions. These issues are load-bearing because they directly control the central claims, but they are not fatal to the framework if the paper is revised to present the extreme branch as a speculative upper envelope and to report rates consistently with stated assumptions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.3 / Conclusions] The central growth claim -- that a 10^3 Msun IMBH seed reaches ~2x10^7 Msun within a few tens of Myr and 'gives rise to the z~5 population of LRDs' -- is obtained only for n1=n2=10^8 pc^-3. The typical case of Sec. 4.2 reaches only ~3x10^5 Msun without gas and barely exceeds 10^6 Msun with 20 gas episodes over 10 Gyr, far below the 10^7-10^8 Msun LRD masses. The 10^8 pc^-3 density is not measured in LRDs; the high-z lensed clusters cited for motivation (Vanzella et al. 2023; Adamo et al. 2024) have masses ~10^6 Msun and effective radii <1 pc, implying average densities ~10^6 pc^-3. Since the paper itself states that cluster density controls the growth rate, the abstract's 'reasonable assumptions' should be replaced by an explicit statement that the LRD-formation scenario is demonstrated only in an extreme, observationally unconstrained density branch, with the 10^6 pc^-3 case presented a
  2. [Sec. 5, Tables 1-2 vs Sec. 7] The reported rate summary is internally inconsistent. Table 1 gives median observer-frame TDE rates of ~40 yr^-1 for 10^6 Msun NSCs and ~3000 yr^-1 for 10^7 Msun NSCs; Table 2 gives median captured-EMRI rates of ~4 yr^-1 and ~500 yr^-1, respectively. The Conclusions state median TDE and EMRI rates of ~500 yr^-1 and ~4 yr^-1, which mix the 10^7 Msun EMRI value with the 10^6 Msun EMRI value and do not correspond to any single column of Tables 1-2. This must be corrected: the authors should specify which NSC mass assumption is used for each headline rate and avoid mixing assumptions across the two tables.
  3. [Sec. 5, rate calculation] The cumulative TDE and EMRI rates are lower limits only in the limited sense that the LRD number densities from Matthee et al. (2024) are lower limits. The per-LRD rates are derived from assumed NSC masses (10^6 vs 10^7 Msun, a factor ~100), from the assumed MBH-sigma relation at z~5, and from the assumption that all LRDs contain collisionally relaxed NSCs. The paper acknowledges that NSC properties are the dominant source of uncertainty, but the abstract and Conclusions present the rates as robust predictions. Please add a summary table or statement that the rates are conditional on these three assumptions, and quantify how the 'at least' claim changes if, for example, the MBH-sigma relation has larger scatter at high redshift or if LRDs do not host relaxed NSCs.
  4. [Sec. 5, Hills mass] The sentence 'we assume that all SMBHs in our examined mass range can produce an observable TDE' ignores the Hills mass, which for lower-spin black holes can be below 10^8 Msun. Since the LRD SMBH mass bins extend to 10^8 Msun, the assumption may overestimate the observable TDE rate. The authors note that spin is not known, but the 'at least' framing is not conservative unless the spin-dependence is either quantified or the rate is restricted to the mass range where the Hills mass is not limiting. A simple estimate of the fraction of TDEs lost due to the Hills mass for representative spin values should be included.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption lists only 'Left', 'Middle', and 'Right', but the figure appears to have four panels (number density, enclosed mass, velocity dispersion, loss-cone/evaporation rates). Please label all panels consistently.
  2. [Sec. 4.3] Typo: 'LDRs' should be 'LRDs' in the sentence describing the three-dimensional model cartoon.
  3. [Eq. (17)] The second argument of the min function has units of mass per time; please state explicitly that this is the free-fall / Bondi-like rate and define all symbols in the equation (rho_g, c_s, frad) in the text.
  4. [Tables 1-2] Please define what 'pessimistic', 'median', and 'optimistic' correspond to in terms of propagated errors (LRD density uncertainty, MBH-sigma scatter, etc.). Currently the table columns are not tied to a stated error prescription.
  5. [Sec. 4.2 / Sec. 4.3] The choice of 20 gas episodes in Sec. 4.2 and 10 episodes in Sec. 4.3 is not motivated. A one-line justification or a test of sensitivity to the number and timing of gas episodes would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the predicted TDE/EMRI rates and BH growth are forward-modeled outputs, not inputs; the NSC parameters are admittedly unconstrained and drive the uncertainty, but no equation reduces a prediction to a fitted parameter.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The paper chooses an NSC two-mass broken-power-law model (Eq. 1), solves Jeans' equation for velocity dispersions (Eqs. 3-5), computes evaporation and loss-cone fluxes (Eqs. 8-16), integrates BH growth through Eq. (18), and then converts per-system rates into cosmic rates using observed LRD number densities from Matthee et al. (2024) via Eq. (27). The central growth result (Sec. 4.3) is an integrated output of the model dynamics for an explicitly stated initial density n1=n2=10^8 pc^-3, not a restatement of that input: the final SMBH mass is not set equal to the cluster mass or to any fitted parameter. Likewise, the cosmological TDE and captured-EMRI rates are computed as a sum over SMBH mass bins of observed LRD number densities times per-system model rates (Sec. 5), so no prediction appears as an input anywhere. The paper candidly labels the NSC parameters as a relatively subjective choice of parameters (Sec. 1) and calls the unknown NSC properties the dominant source of uncertainty (Sec. 5), which is a robustness limitation rather than circularity. Self-citations to Kritos et al. (2023, 2024a, 2024b, 2025) are motivational or comparative and are not used as an unverified uniqueness theorem or ansatz; the key supporting observations (JWST cluster masses/radii, LRD number densities, MBH-sigma at high z) are external. The only notable internal issue is a numerical inconsistency between the Sec. 5 median cumulative TDE rate (~40 yr^-1) and the Conclusions value (~500 yr^-1), which affects the headline number's robustness but is not a circular step. Therefore no circularity is found.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

8 free parameters · 9 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on hand-chosen cluster initial conditions (number densities n1/n2, break radii R1/R2, power-law slopes α/β, seed mass 10^3 M_sun), an assumed NSC mass scale for LRDs (10^6–10^7 M_sun), and assumptions that the MBH-σ relation and loss-cone formalism hold at z≈5. The predicted rates are nearly proportional to the assumed NSC mass. No new physical entities are introduced; the 'Polish doughnut' funnel is taken from prior accretion-disk literature.

free parameters (8)
  • Number densities n1=n2 at break radius = 1e5 pc^-3 (typical); 1e8 pc^-3 (extreme)
    Chosen by hand to resemble high-z clusters (Sec. 4.1, 4.3); controls growth timescale.
  • Break radii R1, R2 = 1 pc / 0.2 pc (typical); 0.4 pc / 0.1 pc (extreme)
    Hand-set initial sizes; compactness is a key driver of rates.
  • Power-law indices α1, α2, β1, β2 = -0.5, -1.0, -5.0, -5.0 (typical); -1.0, -1.5, -5.0, -5.0 (extreme)
    Motivated by simulations but hand-set; define cusp shapes.
  • Seed BH mass = 1e3 M_sun
    Assumes an IMBH seed from earlier formation; starting mass affects early growth (Sec. 4.1).
  • NSC mass for rate calculation = 1e6 M_sun or 1e7 M_sun
    'Educated guess' in Sec. 5 based on Vanzella et al. (2023); predicted rates scale ~100x with this choice.
  • Gas inflow episodes = 20x8e4 M_sun (typical); 10x1e6 M_sun (extreme)
    Hand-chosen to model episodic super-Eddington accretion; affects final BH mass and duty cycle.
  • Fraction of star mass accreted per TDE, f_lc,1 = 0.5
    Standard assumption from Rees (1988), used in Eq. (16).
  • Eddington cap and radiative efficiency = cap = 0.1/frad, frad ~0.1
    Parametrizes super-Eddington accretion; low frad inside photon-trapping radius (Sec. 3.6).
axioms (9)
  • standard math Collisionless Jeans equation (neglect of Fokker-Planck collision term on crossing timescale)
    Invoked in Sec. 3.2, Eq. (3a), following Merritt (2013).
  • domain assumption Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution and two-body relaxation refills the high-velocity tail
    Sec. 3.4, Eqs. (8)-(11); standard for nuclei but an assumption.
  • domain assumption Loss-cone formalism of Syer & Ulmer (1999) and Quinlan & Shapiro (1989) applies
    Sec. 3.6; used for both TDE and GW-capture rates.
  • domain assumption MBH-σ relation holds up to z~9 and is used at z=4-6
    Sec. 5, based on Juodžbalis et al. (2025a).
  • domain assumption Energy equipartition between stars and stellar-mass BHs sets R2 ≈ 0.1 R1
    Sec. 5; if Spitzer instability operates, R2 would be smaller and EMRI rates higher.
  • domain assumption LRD number densities from Matthee et al. (2024) are lower limits and constant over z=4-6
    Sec. 5, Eq. (27); acknowledged as lower bounds.
  • ad hoc to paper Little Red Dots contain collisionally relaxed nuclear star clusters of mass 10^6-10^7 M_sun
    Sec. 5, 'educated guess' based on Vanzella et al. (2023); the dominant uncertainty.
  • ad hoc to paper All SMBHs in the 10^7-10^8 M_sun range can produce observable TDEs (Hills mass not limiting)
    Sec. 5, stated 'For simplicity'; spin-dependent Hills mass could reduce the observable TDE fraction.
  • domain assumption Bondi-based gas accretion capped at Eddington ratio with radiative efficiency frad
    Sec. 3.6, Eq. (17).

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 27153 in / 17084 out tokens · 135545 ms · 2026-08-04T08:11:36.117400+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Little Red Dots, discovered by the James Webb Space Telescope, are hypothesized to be active galactic nuclei containing a supermassive black hole, possibly surrounded by a dense stellar cluster, large amounts of gas, and likely by a population of stellar-mass black holes. We develop a simple nuclear star cluster model to evolve the rapid mass growth of black hole seeds into the supermassive regime. The combined processes of tidal disruption events, black hole captures, and gas accretion are accounted for self-consistently in our model. Given the observed number density of Little Red Dots, and under reasonable assumptions, we predict at least a few tens of tidal disruption events and at least a few black hole captures at z=4-6, with a tidal disruption event rate an order of magnitude larger than the black hole capture rate. We also estimate the uncertainties in these estimates. Finally, we comment on the low x-ray luminosity of Little Red Dots.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.21709 by Joseph Silk, Konstantinos Kritos.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Radial profiles of number densities, total enclosed masses, velocity dispersions, and loss-cone and evaporation fluxes. Left: number density of stellar-mass BHs (blue) and stars (red). A massive BH with mass MBH = 103 M⊙ is placed in the center of the system. The blue and red vertical dashed lines correspond to the influence radii of BHs and stars, respectively. The inset shows the total mass of BHs (blue)… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Time evolution of the system shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: Cartoon of the spherical cluster model developed in this work. The outer diffuse red region corresponds to the bulk stellar population, and the inner blue overdensity is the subcluster of stellar-mass BH remnants (BHs) in the core surrounding a supermassive BH (SMBH) represented by the central black sphere. The faint green sphere indicates the presence of ionized hydrogen gas in the system. The thin … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Cumulative number of tidal disruption events (TDEs), captured extreme-mass ratio inspirals (EMRIs), and 2-body binaries (2-body). Left: The cumulative numbers for the simulations of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Hard x-rays from the BH hot inner corona scat￾tered on Polish doughnut funnel walls. Funnel model and thick accretion disk are from analytical (left) and numerical simulations (right) (Lei et al. 2009). Scattering of hard x-rays as depicted for proxy model of Cygnus X-3 (Veledina et al. 2024). another interpretation (King 2024). Madau & Haardt (2024) discuss x-ray scattering from the funnel walls, a model … 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 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Memoirs of the curvaton: non-perturbative non-Gaussianity and supermassive primordial black holes

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Curvaton self-interactions in non-quadratic potentials produce a local non-Gaussian map that enables supermassive primordial black hole formation at peak amplitudes of order 10^{-5} while remaining consistent with μ-d...

  2. Smoluchowski Coagulation Equation and the Evolution of Primordial Black Hole Clusters

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Monte Carlo solutions to the Smoluchowski coagulation equation yield runaway timescales and mass evolution for primordial black hole clusters at different redshifts based on cluster properties.

  3. Smoluchowski Coagulation Equation and the Evolution of Primordial Black Hole Clusters

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    Monte Carlo solutions of the Smoluchowski equation for PBH clusters yield finite runaway timescales and evolving mass distributions that form high-redshift SMBHs, shortened further by mass segregation.

  4. Tidal disruption event rates across cosmic time: forecasts for LSST, Roman, and JWST and their constraints on the supermassive black hole mass function

    astro-ph.HE 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    TDE rates across redshift are predicted to be highly sensitive to the evolution of the low-mass supermassive black hole mass function, with LSST, Roman, and JWST able to test this.

  5. The quasi-star model for Little Red Dots: potential and challenges

    astro-ph.GA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Quasi-star models using Cloudy radiative transfer reproduce the UV-NIR continuum shape, Balmer break, and hydrogen line luminosities in some LRDs when combined with host galaxy emission, but fail to account for broad ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    D., Vanzella, E., et al

    Adamo, A., Bradley, L. D., Vanzella, E., et al. 2024, Bound star clusters observed in a lensed galaxy 460 Myr after the Big Bang, Nature, 632, 513, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07703-7

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07703-7 2024

  2. [2]

    2009, Strong mass segregation around a massive black hole, Astrophys

    Alexander, T., & Hopman, C. 2009, Strong mass segregation around a massive black hole, Astrophys. J., 697, 1861, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1861

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/697/2/1861 2009

  3. [3]

    Hickox, R. C. 2024, X-Ray View of Little Red Dots: Do They Host Supermassive Black Holes?, Astrophys. J. Lett., 969, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5669

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5669 2024

  4. [4]

    2017, Science with the space-based interferometer LISA

    Babak, S., Gair, J., Sesana, A., et al. 2017, Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. V: Extreme mass-ratio inspirals, Phys. Rev. D, 95, 103012, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.95.103012

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.103012 2017

  5. [5]

    Little Red Dots

    Baggen, J. F. W., van Dokkum, P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, The Small Sizes and High Implied Densities of “Little Red Dots” with Balmer Breaks Could Explain Their Broad Emission Lines without an Active Galactic Nucleus, ApJL, 977, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad90b8

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad90b8 2024

  6. [6]

    Bardeen, J. M. 1970, Kerr Metric Black Holes, Nature, 226, 64, doi: 10.1038/226064a0

    doi:10.1038/226064a0 1970

  7. [7]

    C., & Dexter, J

    Begelman, M. C., & Dexter, J. 2025, Little Red Dots As Late-stage Quasi-stars. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.09085

    arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    2020, Gravitational wave background from extreme mass ratio inspirals, Phys

    Bonetti, M., & Sesana, A. 2020, Gravitational wave background from extreme mass ratio inspirals, Phys. Rev. D, 102, 103023, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.102.103023

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.103023 2020

  9. [9]

    2025, Constraints on the early growth of massive black holes from PTA and JWST with L-GalaxiesBH, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.12325

    Bonoli, S., Izquierdo-Villalba, D., Spinoso, D., et al. 2025, Constraints on the early growth of massive black holes from PTA and JWST with L-GalaxiesBH, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.12325. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.12325

    arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Y., & Li, H

    Choksi, N., Volonteri, M., Colpi, M., Gnedin, O. Y., & Li, H. 2019, The star clusters that make black hole binaries across cosmic time, Astrophys. J., 873, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaffde

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

  11. [11]

    2025, Formation of supermassive stars and dense star clusters in metal-poor clouds exposed to strong FUV radiation, MNRAS, 539, 2561, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf598

    Chon, S., & Omukai, K. 2025, Formation of supermassive stars and dense star clusters in metal-poor clouds exposed to strong FUV radiation, MNRAS, 539, 2561, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf598

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staf598 2025

  12. [12]

    M., & Simon, J

    Comerford, J. M., & Simon, J. 2025, Preferential Accretion onto the Secondary Black Hole Strengthens Gravitational Wave Signals. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.06325 de Graaff, A., Rix, H.-W., Naidu, R. P., et al. 2025, A remarkable Ruby: Absorption in dense gas, rather than evolved stars, drives the extreme Balmer break of a Little Red Dot atz= 3.5, arXiv e-...

    arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Dokuchaev, V. I. 1991, Joint evolution of a galactic nucleus and central massive black hole., MNRAS, 251, 564, doi: 10.1093/mnras/251.4.564

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/251.4.564 1991

  14. [14]

    2021, Observational Support for Massive Black Hole Formation Driven by Runaway Stellar Collisions in Galactic Nuclei, ApJ, 908, 57, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd93c

    Escala, A. 2021, Observational Support for Massive Black Hole Formation Driven by Runaway Stellar Collisions in Galactic Nuclei, ApJ, 908, 57, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd93c

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd93c 2021

  15. [15]

    2025, On the Fate of Little Red Dots

    Escala, A., Zimmermann, L., Valdebenito, S., et al. 2025, On the Fate of Little Red Dots. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.20453

    arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    2022, Nuclear star cluster formation in star-forming dwarf galaxies, A&A, 667, A101, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244932

    Fahrion, K., Bulichi, T.-E., Hilker, M., et al. 2022, Nuclear star cluster formation in star-forming dwarf galaxies, A&A, 667, A101, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244932

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244932 2022

  17. [17]

    Frank, J., & Rees, M. J. 1976, Effects of massive black holes on dense stellar systems., MNRAS, 176, 633, doi: 10.1093/mnras/176.3.633

    doi:10.1093/mnras/176.3.633 1976

  18. [18]

    J., Secunda, A

    Furtak, L. J., Secunda, A. R., Greene, J. E., et al. 2025, Investigating photometric and spectroscopic variability in the multiply imaged little red dot A2744-QSO1, A&A, 698, A227, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554110

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554110 2025

  19. [19]

    Garcia, F. A. B., Ricotti, M., & Sugimura, K. 2025, Seeding Cores: A Pathway for Nuclear Star Clusters from Bound Star Clusters in the First Billion Years, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.08779, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.08779

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.08779 2025

  20. [20]

    2025, JADES reveals a large population of low mass black holes at high redshift, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.22147, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.22147

    Geris, S., Maiolino, R., Isobe, Y., et al. 2025, JADES reveals a large population of low mass black holes at high redshift, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.22147, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.22147

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.22147 2025

  21. [21]

    2021, Tidal Disruption Events, Ann

    Gezari, S. 2021, Tidal Disruption Events, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 59, 21, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-111720-030029

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-111720-030029 2021

  22. [22]

    1993, Binary–Single-Star Scattering

    Goodman, J., & Hut, P. 1993, Binary–Single-Star Scattering. V. Steady State Binary Distribution in a Homogeneous Static Background of Single Stars, ApJ, 403, 271, doi: 10.1086/172200

    doi:10.1086/172200 1993

  23. [23]

    E., Strader, J., & Ho, L

    Greene, J. E., Strader, J., & Ho, L. C. 2020, Intermediate-Mass Black Holes, ARA&A, 58, 257, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021835

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021835 2020

  24. [24]

    E., et al

    Greene, J. E., et al. 2024, UNCOVER Spectroscopy Confirms the Surprising Ubiquity of Active Galactic Nuclei in Red Sources at z>5, Astrophys. J., 964, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f 2024

  25. [25]

    M., Quataert, E., & Springel, V

    Guo, M., Stone, J. M., Quataert, E., & Springel, V. 2025, Cyclic Zoom: Multi-scale GRMHD Modeling of Black Hole Accretion and Feedback. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.16802

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    D., Barnes, A

    Henshaw, J. D., Barnes, A. T., Battersby, C., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 83, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.11223

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.11223 2023

  27. [27]

    Hills, J. G. 1980, The effect of mass loss on the dynamical evolution of a stellar system - Analytic approximations, ApJ, 235, 986, doi: 10.1086/157703

    doi:10.1086/157703 1980

  28. [28]

    2025, Little Red Dots as the Very First Activity of Black Hole Growth, Astrophys

    Inayoshi, K. 2025, Little Red Dots as the Very First Activity of Black Hole Growth, Astrophys. J. Lett., 988, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adea66

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adea66 2025

  29. [29]

    Inayoshi, K., & Maiolino, R. 2025, Extremely Dense Gas around Little Red Dots and High-redshift Active Galactic Nuclei: A Nonstellar Origin of the Balmer Break and Absorption Features, ApJL, 980, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adaebd

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adaebd 2025

  30. [30]

    2025, Spectral Uniformity of Little Red Dots: A Natural Outcome of Coevolving Seed Black Holes and Nascent Starbursts, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.19422

    Inayoshi, K., Murase, K., & Kashiyama, K. 2025, Spectral Uniformity of Little Red Dots: A Natural Outcome of Coevolving Seed Black Holes and Nascent Starbursts, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.19422. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.19422

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    2020, The Assembly of the First Massive Black Holes, Ann

    Inayoshi, K., Visbal, E., & Haiman, Z. 2020, The Assembly of the First Massive Black Holes, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 58, 27, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-120419-014455

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-120419-014455 2020

  32. [32]

    2025, BlackTHUNDER – A non-stellar Balmer break in a black hole-dominated little red dot at z = 7.04, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.13082, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.13082

    Ji, X., Maiolino, R., ¨Ubler, H., et al. 2025, BlackTHUNDER – A non-stellar Balmer break in a black hole-dominated little red dot at z = 7.04, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.13082, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.13082

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.13082 2025

  33. [33]

    C., ¨Ubler, H., Maiolino, R., et al

    Jones, G. C., ¨Ubler, H., Maiolino, R., et al. 2025, BlackTHUNDER: Shedding light on a dormant and extreme little red dot at z=8.50, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.20455, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.20455 Juodˇ zbalis, I., Maiolino, R., Baker, W. M., et al. 2024, A dormant overmassive black hole in the early Universe, Nature, 636, 594, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08...

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.20455 2025

  34. [34]

    2025, JWST Discovery of a High-redshift Tidal Disruption Event Candidate in COSMOS-Web, Astrophys

    Karmen, M., et al. 2025, JWST Discovery of a High-redshift Tidal Disruption Event Candidate in COSMOS-Web, Astrophys. J., 990, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf216

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adf216 2025

  35. [35]

    2025, Semianalytical Fokker–Planck Models for Nuclear Star Clusters, Astrophys

    Kaur, K., Rom, B., & Sari, R. 2025, Semianalytical Fokker–Planck Models for Nuclear Star Clusters, Astrophys. J., 980, 150, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada8a8 From NSCs to LRDs: BH growth, mergers, and TDEs17

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada8a8 2025

  36. [36]

    2024, The black hole masses of high-redshift QSOs, Mon

    King, A. 2024, The black hole masses of high-redshift QSOs, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 531, 550, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1171

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1171 2024

  37. [37]

    E., et al

    Kovacs, O. E., et al. 2024, A Candidate Supermassive Black Hole in a Gravitationally Lensed Galaxy at Z≈10, Astrophys. J. Lett., 965, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad391f

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad391f 2024

  38. [38]

    Krause, M. G. H., et al. 2025, Evidence for Supermassive Black Hole Binaries. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07534

    arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    L., Lachat, M., & Rasio, F

    Kremer, K., Lu, W., Rodriguez, C. L., Lachat, M., & Rasio, F. 2019, Tidal Disruptions of Stars by Black Hole Remnants in Dense Star Clusters, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2e0c

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab2e0c 2019

  40. [40]

    S., Silk, J., et al

    Kritos, K., Beckmann, R. S., Silk, J., et al. 2024a, Supermassive black hole growth in hierarchically merging nuclear star clusters. https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.15334

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    2023, Massive black hole assembly in nuclear star clusters, Phys

    Kritos, K., Berti, E., & Silk, J. 2023, Massive black hole assembly in nuclear star clusters, Phys. Rev. D, 108, 083012, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.108.083012 —. 2024b, Supermassive black holes from runaway mergers and accretion in nuclear star clusters, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 531, 133, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1145

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.083012 2023

  42. [42]

    2024c, Minimum gas mass accreted by spinning intermediate-mass black holes in stellar clusters, Phys

    Kritos, K., Reali, L., Gerosa, D., & Berti, E. 2024c, Minimum gas mass accreted by spinning intermediate-mass black holes in stellar clusters, Phys. Rev. D, 110, 123017, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.123017

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.123017

  43. [43]

    Kritos, K., Reali, L., Ng, K. K. Y., Antonini, F., & Berti, E. 2025, Gravitational wave inference of star cluster properties from intermediate-mass black hole mergers, Phys. Rev. D, 111, 063056, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.111.063056

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.063056 2025

  44. [44]

    R., et al

    Kulkarni, S. R., et al. 2021, Science with the Ultraviolet Explorer (UVEX). https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.15608 Labb´ e, I., van Dokkum, P., Nelson, E., et al. 2023, A population of red candidate massive galaxies 600 Myr after the Big Bang, Nature, 616, 266, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-05786-2 Lah´ en, N., Naab, T., Rantala, A., & Partmann, C. 2025, Mergers all ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    2024, The Case for Super-Eddington Accretion: Connecting Weak X-ray and UV Line Emission in JWST Broad-Line AGN During the First Gyr of Cosmic Time

    Lambrides, E., et al. 2024, The Case for Super-Eddington Accretion: Connecting Weak X-ray and UV Line Emission in JWST Broad-Line AGN During the First Gyr of Cosmic Time. https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.13047

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  46. [46]

    A., Aftab, A., Whalen, D

    Latif, M. A., Aftab, A., Whalen, D. J., & Mezcua, M. 2025, Radio emission from little red dots may reveal their true nature, Astron. Astrophys., 694, L14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453194

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453194 2025

  47. [47]

    R., Ajhar, E

    Lauer, T. R., Ajhar, E. A., Byun, Y. I., et al. 1995, The Centers of Early-Type Galaxies with HST.I.An Observational Survey, AJ, 110, 2622, doi: 10.1086/117719

    doi:10.1086/117719 1995

  48. [48]

    A., Fragile, P

    Lei, Q., Abramowicz, M. A., Fragile, P. C., et al. 2009, The Polish doughnuts revisited I. The angular momentum distribution and equipressure surfaces, Astron. Astrophys., 498, 471, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200811518

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200811518 2009

  49. [49]

    Madau, P. 2025, Chasing the Light: Shadowing, Collimation, and the Super-Eddington Growth of Infant Black Holes in JWST-Discovered AGNs, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.09854, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.09854

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.09854 2025

  50. [50]

    2024, X-Ray Weak Active Galactic Nuclei from Super-Eddington Accretion onto Infant Black

    Madau, P., & Haardt, F. 2024, X-Ray Weak Active Galactic Nuclei from Super-Eddington Accretion onto Infant Black

    2024

  51. [51]

    Holes, Astrophys. J. Lett., 976, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad90e1

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad90e1 2041

  52. [52]

    2024a, JADES - The diverse population of infant black holes at 4<z<11: Merging, tiny, poor, but mighty, Astron

    Maiolino, R., et al. 2024a, JADES - The diverse population of infant black holes at 4<z<11: Merging, tiny, poor, but mighty, Astron. Astrophys., 691, A145, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347640 —. 2024b, A small and vigorous black hole in the early

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347640

  53. [53]

    2025a, A black hole in a near-pristine galaxy 700 million years after the Big Bang

    Universe, Nature, 627, 59, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07494-x —. 2025a, A black hole in a near-pristine galaxy 700 million years after the Big Bang. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22567 —. 2025b, JWST meets Chandra: a large population of Compton thick, feedback-free, and intrinsically X-ray weak AGN, with a sprinkle of SNe, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 538, 1921...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1921

  54. [54]

    2024, Little Red Dots: An Abundant Population of Faint Active Galactic Nuclei at z∼5 Revealed by the EIGER and FRESCO JWST Surveys, Astrophys

    Matthee, J., et al. 2024, Little Red Dots: An Abundant Population of Faint Active Galactic Nuclei at z∼5 Revealed by the EIGER and FRESCO JWST Surveys, Astrophys. J., 963, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345 2024

  55. [55]

    Adamo, A. 2025, In Situ Formation of Star Clusters at z ¿ 7 via Galactic Disk Fragmentation: Shedding Light on Ultracompact Clusters and Overmassive Black Holes Seen by JWST, ApJL, 981, L28, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adadfe

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adadfe 2025

  56. [56]

    2025, Overmassive black holes in the early Universe can be explained by gas-rich, dark matter-dominated galaxies, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.13852, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.13852

    McClymont, W., Tacchella, S., Ji, X., et al. 2025, Overmassive black holes in the early Universe can be explained by gas-rich, dark matter-dominated galaxies, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.13852, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.13852

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.13852 2025

  57. [57]

    2013, Dynamics and evolution of galactic nuclei (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press)

    Merritt, D. 2013, Dynamics and evolution of galactic nuclei (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press)

    2013

  58. [58]

    2002, Runaway merging of black holes: analytical constraint on the timescale, Astrophys

    Mouri, H., & Taniguchi, Y. 2002, Runaway merging of black holes: analytical constraint on the timescale, Astrophys. J. Lett., 566, L17, doi: 10.1086/339472 18K. Kritos & J. Silk

    doi:10.1086/339472 2002

  59. [59]

    2024, Formation of a low-mass galaxy from star clusters in a 600-million-year-old Universe, Nature, 636, 332, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0

    Mowla, L., Iyer, K., Asada, Y., et al. 2024, Formation of a low-mass galaxy from star clusters in a 600-million-year-old Universe, Nature, 636, 332, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0 2024

  60. [60]

    2023, The maximum mass of a black hole which can tidally disrupt a star: measuring black hole spins with tidal disruption events, Mon

    Mummery, A. 2023, The maximum mass of a black hole which can tidally disrupt a star: measuring black hole spins with tidal disruption events, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 527, 6233, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3636

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3636 2023

  61. [61]

    P., et al

    Naidu, R. P., et al. 2025, A ”Black Hole Star” Reveals the Remarkable Gas-Enshrouded Hearts of the Little Red Dots. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.16596

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    2020, Nuclear star clusters, Astron

    Neumayer, N., Seth, A., & Boeker, T. 2020, Nuclear star clusters, Astron. Astrophys. Rev., 28, 4, doi: 10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0 O’Leary, R. M., Kocsis, B., & Loeb, A. 2009, Gravitational waves from scattering of stellar-mass black holes in galactic nuclei, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 395, 2127, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14653.x

    arXiv 2020

  63. [63]

    2025, Little Red Dots Are Nurseries of Massive Black Holes

    Pacucci, F., Hernquist, L., & Fujii, M. 2025, Little Red Dots Are Nurseries of Massive Black Holes. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.02664

    arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    2024, Mildly Super-Eddington Accretion onto Slowly Spinning Black Holes Explains the X-Ray Weakness of the Little Red Dots, Astrophys

    Pacucci, F., & Narayan, R. 2024, Mildly Super-Eddington Accretion onto Slowly Spinning Black Holes Explains the X-Ray Weakness of the Little Red Dots, Astrophys. J., 976, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7 2024

  65. [65]

    2019, Direct N-body simulation of the Galactic centre, MNRAS, 484, 3279, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz208

    Panamarev, T., Just, A., Spurzem, R., et al. 2019, Direct N-body simulation of the Galactic centre, MNRAS, 484, 3279, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz208

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz208 2019

  66. [66]

    B., Hopman, C., & Alexander, T

    Perets, H. B., Hopman, C., & Alexander, T. 2007, Massive perturber-driven interactions of stars with a massive black hole, Astrophys. J., 656, 709, doi: 10.1086/510377

    doi:10.1086/510377 2007

  67. [67]

    B., Li, Z., Lombardi, J

    Perets, H. B., Li, Z., Lombardi, J. C., & Milcarek, S. R. 2016, Micro - tidal disruption events by stellar compact objects and the production of ultra-long GRBs, Astrophys. J., 823, 113, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/113

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/823/2/113 2016

  68. [68]

    2025, Deep silence: Radio properties of little red dots, A&A, 693, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452422

    Perger, K., Fogasy, J., Frey, S., & Gab´ anyi, K.´E. 2025, Deep silence: Radio properties of little red dots, A&A, 693, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452422

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452422 2025

  69. [69]

    L., Volonteri, M., et al

    Pfister, H., Dai, J. L., Volonteri, M., et al. 2021, Tidal disruption events in the first billion years of a galaxy, MNRAS, 500, 3944, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3471

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3471 2021

  70. [70]

    S., et al

    Polak, B., Mac Low, M.-M., Klessen, R. S., et al. 2024, Massive star cluster formation: I. High star formation efficiency while resolving feedback of individual stars, A&A, 690, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348840

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348840 2024

  71. [71]

    2024, Demographics of tidal disruption events with L-Galaxies: I

    Polkas, M., Bonoli, S., Bortolas, E., et al. 2024, Demographics of tidal disruption events with L-Galaxies: I. Volumetric TDE rates and the abundance of nuclear star clusters, A&A, 689, A204, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449470

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449470 2024

  72. [72]

    G., & Abolmasov, P

    Poutanen, J., Fabrika, S., Butkevich, A. G., & Abolmasov, P. 2007, Supercritically accreting stellar mass black holes as ultraluminous X-ray sources, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 377, 1187, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11668.x

    arXiv 2007

  73. [73]

    D., & Shapiro, S

    Quinlan, G. D., & Shapiro, S. L. 1989, Dynamical Evolution of Dense Clusters of Compact Stars, ApJ, 343, 725, doi: 10.1086/167745

    doi:10.1086/167745 1989

  74. [74]

    2025, A rapid channel for the collisional formation and gravitational wave driven mergers of supermassive black hole seeds at high redshift, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.21879

    Rantala, A., & Naab, T. 2025, A rapid channel for the collisional formation and gravitational wave driven mergers of supermassive black hole seeds at high redshift, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.21879. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.21879

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    2025, Micro-Tidal Disruption Events in Young Star Clusters

    Rastello, S., Iorio, G., Gieles, M., & Wang, L. 2025, Micro-Tidal Disruption Events in Young Star Clusters. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.07067

    arXiv 2025

  76. [76]

    Rees, M. J. 1988, Tidal disruption of stars by black holes of 106-108 solar masses in nearby galaxies, Nature, 333, 523, doi: 10.1038/333523a0

    doi:10.1038/333523a0 1988

  77. [77]

    Reynolds, C. S. 2021, Observational Constraints on Black Hole Spin, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 59, 117, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-035022

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-035022 2021

  78. [78]

    2018, The Observational Signatures of Supermassive Black Hole Seeds, Mon

    Ricarte, A., & Natarajan, P. 2018, The Observational Signatures of Supermassive Black Hole Seeds, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 481, 3278, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2448

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2448 2018

  79. [79]

    P., Naab, T., Rantala, A., et al

    Rizzuto, F. P., Naab, T., Rantala, A., et al. 2023, The growth of intermediate mass black holes through tidal captures and tidal disruption events, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 521, 2930, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad734

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad734 2023

  80. [80]

    L., Chatterjee, S., & Rasio, F

    Rodriguez, C. L., Chatterjee, S., & Rasio, F. A. 2016, Binary Black Hole Mergers from Globular Clusters: Masses, Merger Rates, and the Impact of Stellar Evolution, Phys. Rev. D, 93, 084029, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.93.084029

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.084029 2016

Showing first 80 references.