Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 8 minor 1 cited by

The paper reports that LISA, the first space-based gravitational-wave detector, is on track to launch in mid-2035, with a 20-member LISA Science Team organizing six working groups to prepare the mission's science and data products.

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

2026-08-03 08:56 UTC pith:6QPGSPNN

load-bearing objection Useful status snapshot of LISA and the LST, but the date inconsistency must be fixed before it is cited. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2601.15365 v2 pith:6QPGSPNN submitted 2026-01-21 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.GAgr-qc

LISA and the LISA Science Team

Anna Heffernan , Chiara Caprini , Neil Cornish , Jonathan Gair , Catia Grimani , Zoltan Haiman , Erin Kara , Nikos Karnesis
show 14 more authors
Valeriya Korol Astrid Lamberts Nora L\"utzgendorf Guido M\"uller Gijs Nelemans Antoine Petiteau Elena Maria Rossi Alberto Sesana Joey Shapiro Key Deirdre Shoemaker Krista Lynne Smith Stephen R. Taylor Alberto Vecchio William Joseph Weber
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.IM astro-ph.GAgr-qc
keywords LISAgravitational wavesLISA Science Teamspace-based detectorwaveformscompact binariesmission statusdata analysis
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 status report asserts that LISA, the first gravitational-wave detector planned for space, is on schedule for launch in mid-2035. As of late 2025 the mission is in the implementation phase B2, with a prime contractor selected and a payload preliminary design review under way. The European Space Agency and NASA have chosen a 20-scientist LISA Science Team, which has organized itself into six working groups focused on alerts, authorship, communications, figures of merit, the level-3 catalogue, and early-release science panels. The paper argues that these structures are the concrete mechanism through which the mission's four science objectives—galactic binaries, massive black-hole mergers, extreme-mass-ratio inspirals, and stellar-mass binaries—will be turned into actionable, community-accessible results.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that LISA is moving from concept to implementation: ESA has advanced the mission into phase B2, selected the prime contractor, begun the payload preliminary design review, and is about to start the critical design review. In parallel, ESA and NASA selected the 20-member LISA Science Team, whose six working groups (Alerts, Author List, Communications, Figures of Merit, L3 Catalogue, Science Topical Panels) are producing concrete deliverables: alert-pipeline specifications, authorship criteria, a communication strategy, a figures-of-merit tool linking instrument performance to science goals, the content and format of the level-3 catalogue, and a procedure for early

What carries the argument

The organizational machinery is the LISA Science Team and its six working groups. Each working group is assigned a specific pre-launch deliverable—alert specifications, author-list criteria, communication channels, a figures-of-merit tool, the level-3 catalogue design, and early-release science panel procedures—that translates the mission's broad science objectives into executable steps before launch. The figures-of-merit work is especially load-bearing, because it quantifies how instrument changes would affect scientific return during the development phase.

Load-bearing premise

The report's picture of what waveform models are needed rests on the source counts and signal-to-noise ratios quoted from the LISA Redbook and white papers; if those population estimates are stale or wrong, the asserted modeling priorities would not follow.

What would settle it

A public schedule update from the space agency moving the launch beyond mid-2035, or a failure in the payload critical design review forcing a redesign, would contradict the central 'on track' claim. Independently, an updated population synthesis giving far fewer than 10^4 double white dwarfs or typical massive-black-hole-binary signal-to-noise ratios well below 1000 would undercut the specific waveform-accuracy priorities.

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

If this is right

  • If LISA launches in mid-2035 as reported, it will open the millihertz gravitational-wave band, complementing ground-based detectors and enabling observations of galactic double white dwarfs, massive black-hole mergers, and extreme-mass-ratio inspirals.
  • The expected roughly 10^4 individually detectable double white dwarfs and the already-identified verification binaries would make LISA a multi-messenger and galactic-structure probe.
  • The need to handle signals with signal-to-noise ratios near 1000 will push waveform modeling beyond current effective-one-body, phenomenological, and numerical-relativity surrogate accuracy, driving the self-force program toward generic post-adiabatic waveforms.
  • EMRI detections with roughly 10^5 cycles would constrain primary spins to about 10^-5 and masses to about 10^-2, providing formation-channel diagnostics.
  • The LISA Science Team's figures-of-merit and level-3 catalogue processes will directly shape mission performance assessment and final data products.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The working-group structure implies that LISA's pre-launch science will be coordinated centrally, which could set lasting norms for authorship and data-access policies across the mission's operational phase.
  • The emphasis on alerts and multi-messenger coordination suggests LISA is being planned as a real-time astronomy facility, not only a data archive, opening the door to novel follow-up campaigns by electromagnetic observatories.
  • If the Redbook's expected source counts and signal-to-noise ratios are optimistic, the waveform-priority ordering in Section 3 would need revision; comparing those numbers against updated population-synthesis models would be a straightforward check.
  • The figures-of-merit tool, linking instrument specifications to science yield, could serve as a reusable template for planning future gravitational-wave missions beyond LISA.

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

2 major / 8 minor

Summary. This paper, authored by A. Heffernan on behalf of the LISA Science Team, is a status report and scientific overview. It states that LISA is due to launch mid-2035, is currently in phase B2 with OHB as prime contractor and the payload preliminary design review in progress, and it describes the mission architecture (spacecraft, test masses, interferometry, key subsystems) as well as four LISA science objectives with associated waveform-modeling needs. The paper also describes the organization of the 20-member LISA Science Team into six working groups (Alerts, Author List, Communications, Figures of Merit, L3 Catalogue, Science Topical Panels) and summarizes their current activities. The scientific content is drawn mainly from the LISA Redbook, the Science Management Plan, and LISA Consortium white papers; the paper contains no new derivations or original data.

Significance. As a status report, the paper has no technical derivations to validate; its value lies in being an archival snapshot and community-facing summary. The manuscript clearly conveys the present organizational structure of the LISA Science Team, correctly references the relevant official documents, and highlights waveform-modeling priorities (post-adiabatic self-force waveforms, more accurate MBHB waveforms) in a way that will be useful to researchers entering the field. Its central empirical claims about the mission schedule are externally checkable. The main weaknesses are an internal inconsistency in the reported 'as of' date and an unsupported 'on track' assertion; these directly affect the reliability of the status snapshot. If corrected, the paper is a useful record for the community.

major comments (2)
  1. [§1 / title-page abstract] The abstract on the title page states the status is 'as of April 2026,' while Section 1 (the body abstract) states 'as of December 2025'; the arXiv submission is dated 21 Jan 2026. For a status report, the 'as of' date is load-bearing: a reader cannot determine which status facts are current, and the April 2026 date is inconsistent with the submission date. Please harmonize the two abstracts and, if applicable, add a short version-history note explaining which facts were current at which date.
  2. [§2 / abstract] The claim that ESA is 'on track to launch mid-2035' is asserted without any schedule baseline. Section 2 states only that the mission is in phase B2, the prime contractor is OHB, payload PDR is in progress, and payload CDR 'will begin shortly.' No critical-path list, schedule margin, or risk assessment is given to support the 'on track' wording. Please either provide a brief schedule-baseline statement with current milestones and margin, or qualify the claim as 'currently planned for mid-2035' rather than 'on track.'
minor comments (8)
  1. [§3.1] 'Ten’s of EM signals' should be 'Tens of EM signals.'
  2. [§3.2] 'spurn a new pool of knowledge' should be 'spawn a new pool of knowledge'; 'exasperating' is likely 'exacerbating'; 'jarring SNRs' is colloquial and should be 'high SNRs' or 'SNRs of order a thousand.'
  3. [§3.2] The phrase 'LISA will see MBHBs out to arbitrarily large redshift' is stronger than warranted by the cited sensitivity estimates. Suggest 'out to very high redshifts' or a quantitative redshift limit if available.
  4. [§3.2] The statement that IMBHs at z>10 are 'outside all current telescope’s abilities' is too broad, given that JWST has identified black-hole candidates at high redshift. Rephrase to say that IMBHs in this mass range and redshift have not yet been robustly identified.
  5. [§3.4] Typographical errors: 'hierarchal' should be 'hierarchical'; 'wavefroms' should be 'waveforms'; 'spins' in 'aligned spins' is fine but 'BHBs' is not defined (use 'black-hole binaries' at first use).
  6. [§4.2] 'has no expiration data' should be 'has no expiration date.'
  7. [§4.3] The phrase 'Ann Hornschemeier Cardiff of NASA' is unclear; it likely should be 'Ann Hornschemeier of NASA Goddard' or 'Ann Hornschemeier (Cardiff)'? Please clarify the name and affiliation.
  8. [References] Reference [4] has a typo: 'LISA Consoritum' should be 'LISA Consortium.' Also, since several numerical estimates (e.g., ~10^4 DWDs, SNR~1000) are taken from the Redbook and Consortium white papers, consider adding a sentence early in Section 3 that these numbers are drawn from the cited references and are not re-evaluated here.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: this is a status report with externally sourced inputs, not a derivation whose outputs reduce to its inputs.

full rationale

The paper is a mission/science-team status report, not a derivation. It reports mission phase B2, OHB selection, PDR status, LST membership, and working-group activities, and it restates science objectives from the LISA Redbook [1] and LISA Consortium white papers [3,4]. There are no fitted parameters renamed as predictions, no uniqueness theorem imported from prior work, and no equations whose output is equivalent to an input by construction. Quantitative statements such as ~10^4 detectable double white dwarfs or SNR~1000 for MBHBs are explicitly sourced to [1,3,4] as external estimates, and they are not used to force any conclusion. The self-referential nature of some cited documents (LISA Consortium/LST white papers, [45]) is worth noting for provenance, but those citations are not load-bearing: the central facts about the mission phase and LST organization stand on mission documentation and organizational reporting, not on a self-citation chain. The abstract/body date discrepancy ('as of April 2026' vs 'as of December 2025') is a reliability or correctness issue, not circular reasoning. No specific circular reduction can be exhibited, so the appropriate score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper contributes no derivation; its content is a status summary. The ledger therefore lists the background facts the summary relies on: LISA design/sensitivity from the Redbook, waveform-modeling status from the white papers and cited literature, and the administrative status reports in Sections 2 and 4.

axioms (3)
  • domain assumption LISA design, sensitivity, and expected source counts as given in the LISA Redbook [1] are accurate.
    Invoked throughout Section 2 and Section 3 (e.g., ~10^4 DWDs, SNR~1000 for MBHBs) without independent derivation.
  • domain assumption The waveform-modeling status reported in Section 3 accurately reflects the current literature (PN for Galactic binaries, EOB/Phenom/NR for MBHBs, self-force for EMRIs/IMRIs).
    Assertions about model coverage and gaps (e.g., generic post-adiabatic SF waveforms required) are taken from cited papers [27-33].
  • domain assumption The administrative facts in Section 2 and 4 (phase B2, OHB as prime contractor, PDR in progress, 20-member composition and WG chairs) were true as of the stated date.
    These are status claims sourced to SMP [2] and internal LST activity; they are not independently verifiable in the text.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 8229 in / 11881 out tokens · 110295 ms · 2026-08-03T08:56:51.448711+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

LISA, the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, due to launch mid-2035, is a large class space mission by the European Space Agency (ESA). In partnership with NASA and ESA-member states, ESA is on track to launch what is expected to be the first space-based gravitational wave detector. By hosting detectors in space, one gains access to a lower frequency band of gravitational wave sources and, with them, a plethora of new science. To maximise this scientific gain, ESA and NASA selected 20 scientists for the LISA Science Team to carry out and/or lead the necessary actions leading up to LISA's launch. We give a short overview and update of the LISA mission, its science objectives and related waveforms, as well as the work of the LISA Science Team as of April 2026.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Benchmarking wall velocities in cosmological phase transitions: Fluid Ansatz and WallGo

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    The fluid-Ansatz and WallGo methods agree for mild phase transitions but diverge by tens of percent for strong ones, where the semi-classical approximation itself may break down.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 38 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Colpiet al.LISA Definition Study Report

    M. Colpiet al.LISA Definition Study Report. arXiv:2402.07571(2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    LISA Science Management Plan https://www.cosmos.esa.int/documents/15452792/15452811/LISA- Science-Management-Plan.pdf/ (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Afshordiet al.[LISA Consortium Waveform Working Group], Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna.Living Rev Rel.,28, 9 (2025), arXiv:2311.01300

    N. Afshordiet al.[LISA Consortium Waveform Working Group], Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna.Living Rev Rel.,28, 9 (2025), arXiv:2311.01300

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    P. A. Seoaneet al.[LISA Consoritum Astrophysics Working Group], Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna.Living Rev. Rel.26, no.1, 2 (2023), arXiv:2203.06016

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Breiviket al.Characterizing Accreting Double White Dwarf Binaries with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna and Gaia,.Astrophys

    K. Breiviket al.Characterizing Accreting Double White Dwarf Binaries with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna and Gaia,.Astrophys. J. Lett.854, no.1, L1 (2018), arXiv:1710.08370

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    Kupferet al.LISA Galactic Binaries with Astrometry from Gaia DR3.Astrophys

    T. Kupferet al.LISA Galactic Binaries with Astrometry from Gaia DR3.Astrophys. J963, no.2, 100 (2024), arXiv:2302.12719

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Blanchet, Post-Newtonian Theory for Gravitational Waves.Living Rev

    L. Blanchet, Post-Newtonian Theory for Gravitational Waves.Living Rev. Rel.17, 2 (2014), arXiv:1310.1528

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  8. [8]

    T. R. Marsh, G. Nelemans and D. Steeghs, Mass transfer between double white dwarfs.Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.350, 113 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0312577

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  9. [9]

    Giacobbo and M

    N. Giacobbo and M. Mapelli, The progenitors of compact-object binaries: impact of metallicity , common envelope and natal kicks.Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.480, no.2, 2011-2030 (2018), arXiv:1806.00001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  10. [10]

    A. G. Abacet al.[LIGO Scientific, VIRGO and KAGRA], GW231123: A Binary Black Hole Merger with Total Mass 190–265 M⊙.Astrophys. J. Lett.993, no.1, L25 (2025), arXiv:2507.08219

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Linet al.A luminous X-ray outburst from an intermediate-mass black hole in an off-centre star cluster,Nature Astron.2(2018) no.8, 656-661 arXiv:1806.05692

    D. Linet al.A luminous X-ray outburst from an intermediate-mass black hole in an off-centre star cluster,Nature Astron.2(2018) no.8, 656-661 arXiv:1806.05692

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  12. [12]

    J. E. Greene, J. Strader, L. C. Ho, Intermediate-Mass Black Holes,Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.58 (2020), 257-312 arXiv:1911.09678

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  13. [13]

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

    R. Maiolinoet al.JADES - The diverse population of infant black holes at 4<z<11: Merging, tiny , poor, but mighty ,Astron. Astrophys.691(2024), A145 arXiv:2308.01230

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Maiolinoet al.A small and vigorous black hole in the early Universe,Nature627(2024) no.8002, 59-63 [erratum: Nature630(2024) no.8015, E2] arXiv:2305.12492

    R. Maiolinoet al.A small and vigorous black hole in the early Universe,Nature627(2024) no.8002, 59-63 [erratum: Nature630(2024) no.8015, E2] arXiv:2305.12492

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    B. P. Abbottet al.Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger,Astrophys. J. Lett. 848(2017) no.2, L12 arXiv:1710.05833

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  16. [16]

    A. G. Abacet al.[LIGO Scientific, VIRGO and KAGRA], GWTC-4.0: Methods for Identifying and Characterizing Gravitational-wave Transients, arXiv:2508.18081

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [17]

    Ramos-Buades, A

    A. Ramos-Buades, A. Buonanno, H. Estell ´es, M. Khalil, D. P. Mihaylov, S. Ossokine, L. Pompili and M. Shiferaw, Next generation of accurate and efficient multipolar precessing-spin effective-one-body waveforms for binary black holes,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.12, 124037 arXiv:2303.18046

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  18. [18]

    Akcayet al.Effective-one-body multipolar waveform for tidally interacting binary neutron stars up to merger,Phys

    S. Akcayet al.Effective-one-body multipolar waveform for tidally interacting binary neutron stars up to merger,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) no.4, 044051 arXiv:1812.02744

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    Colleoniet al.Fast frequency-domain gravitational waveforms for precessing binaries with a new twist,Phys

    M. Colleoniet al.Fast frequency-domain gravitational waveforms for precessing binaries with a new twist,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) no.10, 104019 arXiv:2412.16721

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    J. E. Thompson, E. Hamilton, L. London, S. Ghosh, P. Kolitsidou, C. Hoy and M. Hannam, PhenomXO4a: a phenomenological gravitational-wave model for precessing black-hole binaries with higher multipoles and asymmetries,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.6, 063012 arXiv:2312.10025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Varmaet al.Surrogate models for precessing binary black hole simulations with unequal masses, Phys

    V. Varmaet al.Surrogate models for precessing binary black hole simulations with unequal masses, Phys. Rev. Research.1(2019), 033015 arXiv:1905.09300

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Hopman and T

    C. Hopman and T. Alexander, The Orbital statistics of stellar inspiral and relaxation near a massive black hole: Characterizing gravitational wave sources,Astrophys. J.629(2005), 362-372 arXiv:astro- ph/0503672

    arXiv 2005

  23. [23]

    Coleman Miller, M

    M. Coleman Miller, M. Freitag, D. P. Hamilton and V. M. Lauburg, Binary encounters with supermassive black holes: Zero-eccentricity LISA events,Astrophys. J. Lett.631(2005), L117-L120 arXiv:astro-ph/0507133

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  24. [24]

    Volonteri, P

    M. Volonteri, P. Madau, E. Quataert and M. J. Rees, The Distribution and cosmic evolution of massive black hole spins,Astrophys. J.620(2005), 69-77 arXiv:astro-ph/0410342

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  25. [25]

    Duque, L

    F. Duque, L. Sberna, A. Spiers and R. Vicente, Extreme-mass-ratio inspirals in relativistic accretion discs, arXiv:2510.02433

    arXiv

  26. [26]

    Z. Pan, H. Yang, L. Bernard and B. Bonga, Resonant dynamics of extreme mass-ratio inspirals in a perturbed Kerr spacetime,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.10, 104026 arXiv:2306.06576

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  27. [27]

    Wardellet al.Gravitational Waveforms for Compact Binaries from Second-Order Self-Force Theory , Phys

    B. Wardellet al.Gravitational Waveforms for Compact Binaries from Second-Order Self-Force Theory , Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) no.24, 241402 arXiv:2112.12265

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Mathews, A

    J. Mathews, A. Pound and B. Wardell, Self-force calculations with a spinning secondary ,Phys. Rev. D 105(2022) no.8, 084031 arXiv:2112.13069

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  29. [29]

    Mathews, B

    J. Mathews, B. Wardell, A. Pound and N. Warburton, Post-adiabatic self-force waveforms: slowly spinning primary and precessing secondary , arXiv:2510.16113

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    K ¨uchler, G

    L. K ¨uchler, G. Comp `ere and A. Pound, Self-force framework for merger-ringdown waveforms, arXiv:2506.02189

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  31. [31]

    Honet, L

    L. Honet, L. K ¨uchler, A. Pound and G. Comp `ere, Transition-to-plunge self-force waveforms with a spinning primary , arXiv:2510.13958

    arXiv

  32. [32]

    Burkeet al.Assessing the importance of first postadiabatic terms for small-mass-ratio binaries, Phys

    O. Burkeet al.Assessing the importance of first postadiabatic terms for small-mass-ratio binaries, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.12, 124048 arXiv:2310.08927

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    C. E. A. Chapman-Birdet al.Efficient waveforms for asymmetric-mass eccentric equatorial inspirals into rapidly spinning black holes,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) no.10, 104023 arXiv:2506.09470

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    N. A. Wittek, L. Barack, H. P. Pfeiffer, A. Pound, N. Deppe, L. E. Kidder, A. Macedo, K. C. Nelli, W. Throwe and N. L. Vu, Relieving Scale Disparity in Binary Black Hole Simulations,Phys. Rev. Lett. 134(2025) no.25, 251402 arXiv:2410.22290

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Honetet al.Spin-aligned inspiral waveforms from self-force and post-Newtonian theory , arXiv:2510.16112

    L. Honetet al.Spin-aligned inspiral waveforms from self-force and post-Newtonian theory , arXiv:2510.16112

    arXiv

  36. [36]

    A. G. Abacet al.[LIGO Scientific, VIRGO and KAGRA], GWTC-4.0: Population Properties of Merging Compact Binaries, arXiv:2508.18083

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Abbottet al.[LIGO Scientific and Virgo], GW190521: A Binary Black Hole Merger with a Total Mass of150M ⊙,Phys

    R. Abbottet al.[LIGO Scientific and Virgo], GW190521: A Binary Black Hole Merger with a Total Mass of150M ⊙,Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) no.10, 101102 arXiv:2009.01075

    arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    S. E. Woosley and A. Heger, The Pair-Instability Mass Gap for Black Holes,Astrophys. J. Lett.912 (2021) no.2, L31 arXiv:2103.07933

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Gerosa and M

    D. Gerosa and M. Fishbach, Hierarchical mergers of stellar-mass black holes and their gravitational- wave signatures,Nature Astron.5(2021) no.8, 749-760 arXiv:2105.03439

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  40. [40]

    Tagawa, B

    H. Tagawa, B. Kocsis, Z. Haiman, I. Bartos, K. Omukai and J. Samsing, Mass-gap Mergers in Active Galactic Nuclei,Astrophys. J.908(2021) no.2, 194 arXiv:2012.00011

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  41. [41]

    Bartos and Z

    I. Bartos and Z. Haiman, Accretion is All You Need: Black Hole Spin Alignment in Merger GW231123 Indicates Accretion Pathway ,Astrophys. J. Lett.996(2026) no.2, L44 arXiv:2508.08558

    arXiv 2026

  42. [42]

    Inayoshi, N

    K. Inayoshi, N. Tamanini, C. Caprini and Z. Haiman, Probing stellar binary black hole formation in galactic nuclei via the imprint of their center of mass acceleration on their gravitational wave signal, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) no.6, 063014 arXiv:1702.06529

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  43. [43]

    Baker, E

    T. Baker, E. Barausse, A. Chen, C. de Rham, M. Pieroni and G. Tasinato, Testing gravitational wave propagation with multiband detections,JCAP03(2023), 044 arXiv:2209.14398

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    Muttoni, A

    N. Muttoni, A. Mangiagli, A. Sesana, D. Laghi, W. Del Pozzo, D. Izquierdo-Villalba and M. Rosati, Multiband gravitational wave cosmology with stellar origin black hole binaries,Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) no.4, 043509 arXiv:2109.13934

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    Capriniet al.[LISA Science Team], Science of the LISA mission: A Summary for the European Strategy for Particle Physics, arXiv:2507.05130 (2025)

    C. Capriniet al.[LISA Science Team], Science of the LISA mission: A Summary for the European Strategy for Particle Physics, arXiv:2507.05130 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    LISA Consortium Figures of Merit (Static), https://wiki-lisa.in2p3.fr/fom-sites/dc 82 fmin 1e- 4/site/ (2024)

    2024

  47. [47]

    VALLDEMOSSA KM 7.5, E-07122 PALMA, SPAIN Email address:anna.heffernan@uib.eu

    LISA Consortium Figures of Merit (Interactive), https://lisa-science-explorer.in2p3.fr/ (2024) DEPARTAMENT DEF ´ISICA, UNIVERSITAT DE LESILLESBALEARS, IAC3 – IEEC, CRTA. VALLDEMOSSA KM 7.5, E-07122 PALMA, SPAIN Email address:anna.heffernan@uib.eu

    2024