Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Dynamical hair growth in black hole binaries in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes that in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity, binary black holes that are initially hairless can dynamically acquire a scalar charge during the inspiral, and argues this process may be observable with third-generation

desk verdict First fully nonlinear NR confirmation of dynamical scalarization in EsGB BBHs, with an honest but model-dependent detectability estimate that should be read as an upper limit. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.02650 v2 pith:2BVIB6VB submitted 2026-02-02 gr-qc

Lodovico Capuano , Llibert Aresté Saló , Daniela D. Doneva , Stoytcho S. Yazadjiev , Enrico Barausse This is my paper
classification gr-qc MSC 83C5783C3583C2583-08 PACS 04.25.Dg04.30.-w04.50.Kd
keywords dynamicalscalarizationEinstein-scalar-Gauss-BonnetgravityblackholehairWaldentropynumericalrelativitygravitationalwavedephasingscalarchargethird-generationdetectors
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper aims to establish that binary black holes that are initially identical to General Relativity black holes (no scalar hair) can spontaneously grow a scalar charge during the inspiral, once the orbital separation drops below a critical value. They propose tracking the inspiral as an adiabatic sequence of static black hole solutions in which the total Wald entropy is conserved, and use this to compute the scalar charge evolution, the gravitational-wave dephasing relative to GR, and the conditions for detecting the effect with third-generation detectors. Fully nonlinear numerical-relativity simulations are run for several configurations and are shown to agree with the semi-analytic model where the adiabatic assumption holds. The claim matters because it provides a concrete, testable regime in a modified theory of gravity where black holes acquire a new observable property, producing a phase shift in the gravitational-wave signal that future observatories might resolve.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a two-step adiabatic model. First, static spherically symmetric black hole solutions are computed with constant Wald entropy S_W = A_EH/4 + 4 pi lambda^2 f(phi_EH), producing sequences of solutions parameterized by the asymptotic scalar field phi_infinity. Second, the two-body interaction is captured at leading order by the coupled algebraic equations phi_A = Q(S, phi_B)/d and phi_B = Q(S, phi_A)/d, where Q is the scalar charge; the appearance of a nontrivial solution at a critical separation signals dynamical scalarization. The same entropy-conserving sequences feed a post-Newtonian formula for the gravitational-wave dephasing, while the numerical simulations evolve the ful

What would settle it

A full nonlinear numerical-relativity simulation of an equal-mass binary starting from a separation larger than the predicted scalarization radius, with a small scalar seed, that shows the scalar field never grows to the predicted amplitude would falsify the adiabatic model. Observationally, a gravitational-wave event from a binary in the predicted mass/coupling window showing no excess dephasing relative to GR at the sensitivity of a third-generation detector would rule out the detectability claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity with the coupling function f(phi) = (1/(2 beta))(1 - exp(-beta phi^2)), a binary of two initially uncharged black holes undergoes a non-perturbative transition: when the separation reaches the scalarization radius d_DS, the scalar field at the horizons grows rapidly and settles to a quasi-equilibrium value, meaning the black holes acquire scalar hair that they did not possess in isolation. The authors confirm this with the first fully nonlinear numerical-relativity simulations of the process, and show that the semi-analytic model based on Wald entropy conservation agrees with the simulations for sufficiently large scalariz

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the inspiral is adiabatic in the sense that the total Wald entropy is conserved while the binary passes through a sequence of static, isolated black hole solutions; if the scalar field's growth time is long compared to the inspiral timescale—as the authors themselves find for small scalarization radii—the predicted radius, charges, and dephasing shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If a nearly equal-mass binary black hole is in the right mass/coupling window, its inspiraling gravitational-wave signal will accumulate a phase lag relative to a GR waveform, growing most rapidly in the last cycles before merger.
  • The scalarization radius is maximized for equal-mass systems and increases as the coupling approaches the isolated scalarization threshold (lambda/M)^2 ~ 0.7255; even a small mass asymmetry substantially shrinks the effect.
  • The post-Newtonian dephasing estimate is consistent in order of magnitude with the nonlinear simulations but underestimates the numerical dephasing by a factor of 2-3, so the true signal may be somewhat stronger than the detectability curves suggest.
  • For the parameter range studied, dynamical scalarization does not produce a dominant scalar dipole flux; the leading observable is the accumulated phase shift, not the dipole or amplitude change.
  • With third-generation detectors, the effect could be seen at redshifts up to a few tenths for total masses around 20-60 solar masses, with the exact window set by the coupling constant and current pulsar constraints.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Wald-entropy adiabatic model holds beyond the quasi-circular, non-spinning case, the same technique could be extended to eccentric orbits or spinning binaries, where the scalarization threshold may shift and the signal could differ qualitatively.
  • The narrow coupling window that maximizes detectability coincides with the regime where an isolated black hole is on the verge of scalarizing; a single detected event with no excess dephasing could therefore place tight limits on the coupling in a regime complementary to pulsar timing constraints.
  • The authors' finding that smaller scalarization radii fail to reach quasi-equilibrium suggests that real binaries may show a continuous spectrum of hair growth, from full adiabatic development to partial development, which future waveform models will need to interpolate.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies dynamical scalarization (DS) in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity, in which binary black holes initially described by GR acquire scalar charges below a critical separation. It constructs a semi-analytic model based on adiabatic conservation of the total Wald entropy, iteratively solving the two-body scalar-field equations to obtain the scalar charge and horizon scalar field as functions of separation. It then presents fully nonlinear numerical-relativity simulations using the GRFolres/GRChombo code, comparing the apparent-horizon scalar field with the semi-analytic prediction, and reports agreement in the adiabatic regime down to d≈6M. The paper also computes the gravitational-wave dephasing with respect to GR and uses a frequency-domain detectability criterion to argue that DS might be observable with ET in a narrow mass/coupling window near the isolated scalarization threshold.

Significance. If correct, this would be the first fully nonlinear numerical-relativity demonstration of dynamical scalarization in black-hole binaries in EsGB gravity, supported by a simple semi-analytic model that can be used for cheap parameter-space exploration. The NR simulations include convergence tests, two different scalar initial-data choices, and a comparison with the semi-analytic curve that is nontrivial. The detectability estimate, while approximate, translates the strong-field effect into a concrete observational target for third-generation detectors. The paper is squarely within the journal's scope and addresses an active topic. The main weakness is that the constant-entropy assumption underpinning the semi-analytic model and the detectability claim is not directly verified against the numerical data.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II, Eq. (6); Sec. V, Fig. 10] The semi-analytic model assumes that the total Wald entropy S_W = A_EH/4 + 4πλ² f(φ_EH) is conserved during the inspiral. This assumption is never tested against the NR data: the simulations in Sec. III compare only the apparent-horizon scalar field and do not measure S_W or its components. The dephasing (Eq. 8) and the ET detectability curves (Fig. 10) are built from Q(f) obtained from constant-entropy sequences. If S_W drifts because of scalar/gravitational radiation or the non-stationarity of the horizons, Q(f) and hence the predicted dephasing and z_max shift. Since the detectability claim is a central result, please either compute S_W along the dynamical horizons in the existing runs and verify approximate conservation over the inspiral range used, or quantify how a plausible S_W drift changes the z_max curves. This is a load-bearing assumption, not a cosmetic caveat.
  2. [Sec. III C, Fig. 6; Abstract] The abstract's unqualified 'consistent results' is stronger than what is demonstrated. For the parameter set used in the detectability study ((λ/M)^2=0.703, β=16), the NR run starts at d=15M, inside the predicted d_DS=19.75M; the large-separation part of φ(d) and the value of d_DS itself are not directly tested for this configuration. The only run beginning outside d_DS is model (ii) with (λ/M)^2=0.688, where the onset of exponential growth is observed near d≈11.71M as predicted. Please either add a simulation for the main detectability parameter starting beyond d_DS, or soften the abstract/conclusions to state that the scalarization radius is directly validated only for (λ/M)^2=0.688 and is otherwise inferred by continuation of the semi-analytic model.
  3. [Sec. IV, Fig. 8; Sec. V] The PN dephasing formula (Eq. 8) is used to produce the detectability curves, but for the one configuration where both are available the PN dephasing differs from the NR dephasing by a factor 2–3 (Fig. 8). The authors note this and state that PN underestimates the dephasing, but the NR measurement is noisy and the sign/bias is not established across parameter space. Because Fig. 10 and the 'observable with ET' claim rest on the PN prescription, please quantify how z_max changes if the dephasing is rescaled by the observed factor (or by its reciprocal), or otherwise state the resulting systematic uncertainty in the detectability curves. Without this, the narrowness of the claimed mass/coupling window is not robust.
minor comments (4)
  1. [References, [10]] Reference [10] in the bibliography is corrupted: it contains a raw BibTeX entry beginning '@articleAkyuz:2025seg...' inline with the text 'pp. 041039'. This should be cleaned and converted to a normal citation.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] Caption contains a typo: 'repict' should be 'depict'.
  3. [Sec. IV, text] Typo: 'In additon' should be 'In addition'.
  4. [Abstract] Consider adding a qualifier such as 'in the adiabatic regime' to the claim of consistency between NR and the semi-analytic model, as done later in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the NR simulations independently confirm the semi-analytic scalarization model, and the detectability estimates are explicitly acknowledged extrapolations rather than fitted predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that GR-initialized BBH systems in EsGB can dynamically scalarize at a critical separation—rests on two independent legs. The semi-analytic model (Sec. II) constructs Q(S_W, φ∞) from static, isolated, constant-Wald-entropy BH sequences and solves the algebraic system of Eq. (3); the scalarization radius dDS is a derived output, not an input. The NR simulations (Sec. III) solve the full nonlinear EsGB field equations with small scalar seeds, without imposing Eq. (3) or entropy conservation, and observe scalar growth near the semi-analytically predicted dDS. For example, in Fig. 4 the seed field initially decreases and only starts growing after the separation crosses the semi-analytic threshold d=11.71M, so the comparison in Fig. 6 is a genuine cross-check rather than a fit. The dephasing computation in Sec. IV uses the same semi-analytic Q(f) in the PN formula Eq. (8) and compares it to the NR dephasing; this is an internal consistency test, but no target quantity (dephasing, zmax) is used to construct Q(S_W, φ∞) or dDS. The detectability estimate in Sec. V is explicitly presented as an order-of-magnitude extrapolation, and the authors themselves flag the adiabatic approximation's breakdown for small dDS and the factor 2–3 disagreement between PN and NR dephasing; these are limitations and validation gaps, not definitional equivalences. Self-citations appear (e.g., [56] for the coupling, [63] for the two-body system, [86] for the GRFolres code, [89] for NR techniques), but they cite methods and prior results with independent content; none is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or used to forbid alternatives. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The most that can be said is that the detectability claim inherits the semi-analytic model's untested constant-entropy assumption, but this is an acknowledged modeling uncertainty, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central predictions depend on λ, β, and the entropy-conservation assumption; these are not derived from the target result. The static-solution input Q(S,φ∞) comes from prior scalarization work, and the phenomenological charges are then checked against NR in the adiabatic regime. The detectability forecast additionally depends on hand-chosen cutoffs and PN coefficients, making it a semi-quantitative upper limit.

free parameters (4)
  • λ (EsGB coupling length) = Scanned: λ = 24.75, 37.13, 49.50, 61.88, 74.25 km; also (λ/M)^2 = 0.688–0.712 in NR runs
    Theory coupling, not fitted to data, but the detectability claim is evaluated at values tuned so (λ/M)^2 = 0.703 for 20–60 solar-mass binaries, near the DS threshold.
  • β (coupling-function parameter) = 16, 32, 48, 800 (dimensionless)
    Dimensionless factor in f(φ)=(1/(2β))(1−e^{−βφ²}); β=16 is chosen for detectability because smaller β gives larger scalar charges.
  • Inspiral end cutoff d=6M = d_end = 6M
    The detectability integral (Eq. 16) stops at d=6M, chosen from where the semi-analytic/NR comparison breaks down; zmax values depend on this choice.
  • Sensitivity coefficients s1, s2 = Not quoted; fitted cubic in φ near 0 from static sequences (Appendix B)
    Used only for the perturbative comparison formula (B4), not for the main semi-analytic model.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Wald entropy formula S_W = A_EH/4 + 4πλ² f(φ_EH) is the correct black-hole entropy in EsGB.
    Taken from prior Wald/Iyer and Julié-Berti results; the semi-analytic entropy-conservation model is built directly on it (Eq. 6).
  • domain assumption Total Wald entropy of the binary is conserved during the inspiral.
    Key adiabatic premise (Sec. II): sequences at constant entropy replace the true dynamical evolution; the authors show it is violated for small scalarization radii.
  • domain assumption The scalar field of each companion can be approximated by the leading 1/d term (Eq. 3).
    Truncates the far-field expansion Eq. (2) and ignores higher multipoles and nonlinear screening.
  • domain assumption Static, spherically symmetric scalarized BH solutions exist for f(φ)=(1/2β)(1−e^{−βφ²}) and define Q(S,φ∞).
    Relies on prior spontaneous-scalarization papers [54,55,92] and shooting-method numerics; no closed-form solution is used.
  • domain assumption The modified harmonic/puncture formulation of EsGB is well posed and constraint damping removes the initial constraint violations.
    Uses well-posedness results [79,80,84,85] and GRFolres; the scalar-field initial data used here are not constraint-satisfying (Sec. III B).
  • domain assumption No cosmological background scalar field; φ∞ is sourced only by the companion.
    Assumed in Sec. II; a cosmological background would change the equilibrium charges and scalarization radius.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical hair growth in black hole binaries in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2BVIB6VB

@misc{pith2026260202650,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical hair growth in black hole binaries in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2BVIB6VB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.02650}
}
read the original abstract

Within the framework of scalar-tensor theories of gravity, certain models can evade classical black hole no-hair theorems. A well-known example is Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity, where black holes carrying a scalar charge can exist. We find that, within this theory, binary black holes initially described by General Relativity can acquire scalar charges once they reach a critical orbital separation ("dynamical scalarization"). We develop a simple semi-analytic model, based on the adiabatic conservation of the total Wald entropy, to estimate the scalar charge evolution during the binary inspiral. We also run fully nonlinear numerical-relativity simulations for different configurations, finding consistent results. The gravitational-wave phase difference between Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet and General Relativity waveforms, which we use to assess detectability, is also computed. We find that dynamical scalarization might be observable in nearly equal-mass binary black hole mergers with third-generation ground-based gravitational-wave detectors, in a narrow range of the dimensional coupling of the theory.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.02650 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Scalar field at the event horizon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Effect of a slight mass asymmetry ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4: The scalar field development for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The scalar field development for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: The average value of the scalar field at the appar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Dephasing between GR and EsGB gravity in frequency domain for the simulations presented in Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Dephasing between GR and EsGB gravity in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Maximum redshift for which DS is potentially [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: Comparison of the prediction for the dimen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: Differences of the orbital phase [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_12.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Scalar memory from compact binary coalescences

    gr-qc 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    In Ricci-coupled scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity, the change in scalar charge during binary black hole mergers generates a scalar memory contribution that modifies the total memory signal on observable timescales.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [69]

    Modeling dynamical scalarization with a resummed post-Newtonian expan- sion,

    N. Sennett and A. Buonanno, “Modeling dynamical scalarization with a resummed post-Newtonian expan- sion,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 93, no. 12, p. 124004, 2016

    2016

  2. [1]

    Our estimate ofzmax must be viewed as an order of magnitude estimate. In realistic systems, the ge- ometrical configuration is not optimal, and the co- variances among different astrophysical parameters would further reduce the BF of EsGB with respect to GR. On the other hand, as shown in Fig. 8, the PN approach seems to underestimate the GW dephas- ing, ...

  3. [2]

    Making Sense of the Unexpected in the Gravitational-Wave Sky

    Fig. 10 does not represent the observability of BH hairs in EsGB in general, but only in the DS sce- nario. In other words, for different component masses and/or different mass ratios, a more promis- ingobservational strategytotest EsGB wouldbeto look for dipole fluxes [112], due to either induced or spontaneous scalarization. In fact, as already discusse...

    2022

  4. [3]

    Explanation of the Perihelion Motion of Mercury from the General Theory of Relativity,

    A. Einstein, “Explanation of the Perihelion Motion of Mercury from the General Theory of Relativity,” Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys. ), vol. 1915, pp. 831–839, 1915

    1915

  5. [4]

    The confrontation between general rela- tivity and experiment,

    C. M. Will, “The confrontation between general rela- tivity and experiment,”Living Reviews in Relativity, vol. 17, Jun 2014

    2014

  6. [5]

    Fourth Test of General Relativity,

    I. I. Shapiro, “Fourth Test of General Relativity,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 13, pp. 789–791, 1964

    1964

  7. [6]

    Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,

    B. P. Abbottet al., “Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 116, no. 6, p. 061102, 2016

    2016

  8. [7]

    On The influence of gravitation on the propagation of light,

    A. Einstein, “On The influence of gravitation on the propagation of light,”Annalen Phys., vol. 35, pp. 898– 908, 1911

    1911

Show all 117 references
  1. [8]

    A Determination of the Deflection of Light by the Sun’s Gravitational Field, from Observations Made at the To- tal Eclipse of May 29, 1919,

    F. W. Dyson, A. S. Eddington, and C. Davidson, “A Determination of the Deflection of Light by the Sun’s Gravitational Field, from Observations Made at the To- tal Eclipse of May 29, 1919,”Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A, vol. 220, pp. 291–333, 1920

    1919

  2. [9]

    Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3,

    R. Abbottet al., “Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3,” 12 2021

    2021

  3. [10]

    AssumingΛCDMcosmology, the cosmic vol- ume corresponding toz≃0.4is≃15.64 Gpc 3

    Gpc−3 yr−1M−1 ⊙ for BBHs with component masses ∼10M ⊙. AssumingΛCDMcosmology, the cosmic vol- ume corresponding toz≃0.4is≃15.64 Gpc 3. There- fore, we can expect a number of∼O(101−10 2)merger events per year in this region. However, only a very small fraction of these events i...

  4. [11]

    Tests of general relativity with GW150914,

    B. P. Abbottet al., “Tests of general relativity with GW150914,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 116, no. 22, p. 221101, 2016. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 129902 (2018)]

    2016

  5. [12]

    GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coales- cences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First HalfoftheThirdObservingRun,

    R. Abbottet al., “GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coales- cences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First HalfoftheThirdObservingRun,”Phys. Rev. X,vol.11, p. 021053, 2021

    2021

  6. [13]

    Population of Merging Compact Binaries Inferred Using Gravitational Waves through GWTC-3,

    R. Abbottet al., “Population of Merging Compact Binaries Inferred Using Gravitational Waves through GWTC-3,”Phys. Rev. X, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 011048@ar- ticleAkyuz:2025seg, author = Akyüz, Aleyna and Cor- reia, Alex and Garofalo, Jada and Kacanja, Keisi and Roy, Labani and Son...

    2025 arXiv

  7. [14]

    GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coales- cences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second PartoftheThirdObservingRun,

    R. Abbottet al., “GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coales- cences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second PartoftheThirdObservingRun,”Phys. Rev. X,vol.13, no. 4, p. 041039, 2023

    2023

  8. [15]

    GWTC-2.1: Deep extended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run,

    R. Abbottet al., “GWTC-2.1: Deep extended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 109, no. 2, p. 022001, 2024

    2024

  9. [16]

    Observation of Gravitational Waves from Two Neutron Star–Black Hole Coalescences,

    R. Abbottet al., “Observation of Gravitational Waves from Two Neutron Star–Black Hole Coalescences,”As- trophys. J. Lett., vol. 915, no. 1, p. L5, 2021. 16

    2021

  10. [17]

    GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog with Observa- tions from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO-Virgo- KAGRA Observing Run,

    A. G. Abacet al., “GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog with Observa- tions from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO-Virgo- KAGRA Observing Run,” 8 2025

    2025

  11. [18]

    Potential science with GW250114 – the loudest binary black hole merger detected to date,

    A. Akyüz, A. Correia, J. Garofalo, K. Kacanja, L. Roy, K. Soni, H. Tan, V. J. Y, A. H. Nitz, and C. D. Capano, “Potential science with GW250114 – the loudest binary black hole merger detected to date,” 7 2025

    2025

  12. [19]

    Tests of grav- itational wave propagation with LIGO-Virgo catalog,

    X.-L. Wang, S.-C. Yang, and W.-B. Han, “Tests of grav- itational wave propagation with LIGO-Virgo catalog,” 4 2024

    2024

  13. [20]

    GW250114: Testing Hawking’s Area Law and the Kerr Nature of Black Holes,

    A. G. Abacet al., “GW250114: Testing Hawking’s Area Law and the Kerr Nature of Black Holes,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 135, no. 11, p. 111403, 2025

    2025

  14. [21]

    Black Hole Spectroscopy and Tests of General Relativity with GW250114,

    A. G. Abacet al., “Black Hole Spectroscopy and Tests of General Relativity with GW250114,” 9 2025

    2025

  15. [22]

    Gravitational collapse and space-time sin- gularities,

    R. Penrose, “Gravitational collapse and space-time sin- gularities,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 14, pp. 57–59, 1965

    1965

  16. [23]

    S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis,The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time. Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press, 2 2023

    2023

  17. [24]

    Penrose’s 1965 singularity theorem: from geodesic incompleteness to cosmic censorship,

    K. Landsman, “Penrose’s 1965 singularity theorem: from geodesic incompleteness to cosmic censorship,” Gen. Rel. Grav., vol. 54, no. 10, p. 115, 2022

    1965

  18. [25]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog- ical parameters,

    N. Aghanimet al., “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog- ical parameters,”Astron. Astrophys., vol. 641, p. A6,

    2018

  19. [26]

    The present state of Dirac’s cosmological hypothesis,

    P. Jordan, “The present state of Dirac’s cosmological hypothesis,”Z. Phys., vol. 157, pp. 112–121, 1959

    1959

  20. [27]

    Measurements ofΩandΛfrom 42 High Redshift Supernovae,

    S. Perlmutteret al., “Measurements ofΩandΛfrom 42 High Redshift Supernovae,”Astrophys. J., vol. 517, pp. 565–586, 1999

    1999

  21. [28]

    Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmo- logical constant,

    A. G. Riess and et al., “Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmo- logical constant,”The Astronomical Journal, vol. 116, no. 3, pp. 1009–1038, 1998

    1998

  22. [29]

    On relativistic wave equa- tionsforparticlesofarbitraryspininanelectromagnetic field,

    M. Fierz and W. Pauli, “On relativistic wave equa- tionsforparticlesofarbitraryspininanelectromagnetic field,”Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A, vol. 173, pp. 211–232, 1939

    1939

  23. [30]

    Nonperturbative strong field effects in tensor - scalar theories of gravita- tion,

    T. Damour and G. Esposito-Farese, “Nonperturbative strong field effects in tensor - scalar theories of gravita- tion,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 70, pp. 2220–2223, 1993

    1993

  24. [31]

    Mach’s principle and a rel- ativistic theory of gravitation,

    C. Brans and R. H. Dicke, “Mach’s principle and a rel- ativistic theory of gravitation,”Phys. Rev., vol. 124, pp. 925–935, 1961

    1961

  25. [32]

    Mach’s principle and invariance under transformation of units,

    R. H. Dicke, “Mach’s principle and invariance under transformation of units,”Phys. Rev., vol. 125, pp. 2163– 2167, 1962

    1962

  26. [33]

    Tensor multiscalar theories of gravitation,

    T. Damour and G. Esposito-Farese, “Tensor multiscalar theories of gravitation,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 9, pp. 2093–2176, 1992

  27. [34]

    Kinetically driven quintessence,

    T. Chiba, T. Okabe, and M. Yamaguchi, “Kinetically driven quintessence,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 62, p. 023511, 2000

    2000

  28. [35]

    Second-order scalar-tensor field equations in a four-dimensional space,

    G. W. Horndeski, “Second-order scalar-tensor field equations in a four-dimensional space,”Int. J. Theor. Phys., vol. 10, pp. 363–384, 1974

    1974

  29. [36]

    Healthy theories beyond Horndeski,

    J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, “Healthy theories beyond Horndeski,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 114, no. 21, p. 211101, 2015

    2015

  30. [37]

    Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor (DHOST) theories,

    D. Langlois, “Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor (DHOST) theories,” in52nd Rencontres de Moriond on Gravitation, pp. 221–228, 2017

    2017

  31. [38]

    Nonexistence of baryon number for static black holes,

    J. D. Bekenstein, “Nonexistence of baryon number for static black holes,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 5, pp. 1239–1246, 1972

    1972

  32. [39]

    Ghost condensation and a consistent infrared modification of gravity,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, H.-C. Cheng, M. A. Luty, and S. Mukohyama, “Ghost condensation and a consistent infrared modification of gravity,”JHEP, vol. 05, p. 074, 2004

    2004

  33. [40]

    The Galileon as a local modification of gravity,

    A. Nicolis, R. Rattazzi, and E. Trincherini, “The Galileon as a local modification of gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 79, p. 064036, 2009

    2009

  34. [41]

    Becker, M

    K. Becker, M. Becker, and J. H. Schwarz,String the- ory and M-theory: A modern introduction. Cambridge University Press, 12 2006

    2006

  35. [42]

    Asymptotically flat black holes with scalar hair: a review,

    C. A. R. Herdeiro and E. Radu, “Asymptotically flat black holes with scalar hair: a review,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, vol. 24, no. 09, p. 1542014, 2015

    2015

  36. [43]

    Nonexistence of baryon number for black holes. ii,

    J. D. Bekenstein, “Nonexistence of baryon number for black holes. ii,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 5, pp. 2403–2412, 1972

    1972

  37. [44]

    No-Hair Theorem for the Galileon,

    L. Hui and A. Nicolis, “No-Hair Theorem for the Galileon,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 110, p. 241104, 2013

    2013

  38. [45]

    Nonexistence of black holes with noncanonical scalar fields,

    A. A. H. Graham and R. Jha, “Nonexistence of black holes with noncanonical scalar fields,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 89, no. 8, p. 084056, 2014. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 92, 069901 (2015)]

    2014

  39. [46]

    Black hole hair in gener- alizedscalar-tensorgravity: Anexplicitexample,

    T. P. Sotiriou and S.-Y. Zhou, “Black hole hair in gener- alizedscalar-tensorgravity: Anexplicitexample,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 90, p. 124063, 2014

    2014

  40. [47]

    Black hole hairs in scalar-tensor gravity and the lack thereof,

    L. Capuano, L. Santoni, and E. Barausse, “Black hole hairs in scalar-tensor gravity and the lack thereof,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 108, no. 6, p. 064058, 2023

    2023

  41. [48]

    No-hair theorems in general relativity and scalar–tensor theories,

    S. S. Yazadjiev and D. D. Doneva, “No-hair theorems in general relativity and scalar–tensor theories,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, vol. 34, no. 09, p. 2530004, 2025

    2025

  42. [49]

    Black hole hair in gener- alized scalar-tensor gravity,

    T. P. Sotiriou and S.-Y. Zhou, “Black hole hair in gener- alized scalar-tensor gravity,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 112, p. 251102, 2014

    2014

  43. [50]

    The power of binary pulsars in test- ing Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    P. Y. Yordanov, K. V. Staykov, S. S. Yazadjiev, and D. D. Doneva, “The power of binary pulsars in test- ing Gauss-Bonnet gravity,”Astron. Astrophys., vol. 687, p. A17, 2024

    2024

  44. [51]

    Con- straining scalarization in scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity through binary pulsars,

    V. I. Danchev, D. D. Doneva, and S. S. Yazadjiev, “Con- straining scalarization in scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity through binary pulsars,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 106, no. 12, p. 124001, 2022

    2022

  45. [52]

    Constraining spontaneous black hole scalarization in scalar-tensor-Gauss-Bonnet theories with current gravitational-wave data,

    L. K. Wong, C. A. R. Herdeiro, and E. Radu, “Constraining spontaneous black hole scalarization in scalar-tensor-Gauss-Bonnet theories with current gravitational-wave data,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 106, no. 2, p. 024008, 2022

    2022

  46. [53]

    Constraints on Einstein- dilation-Gauss-Bonnet gravity from black hole-neutron star gravitational wave events,

    Z. Lyu, N. Jiang, and K. Yagi, “Constraints on Einstein- dilation-Gauss-Bonnet gravity from black hole-neutron star gravitational wave events,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 105, no. 6, p. 064001, 2022. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 106, 069901 (2022), Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 106, 069901 (2022)]

    2022

  47. [54]

    New Gauss-Bonnet Black Holes with Curvature-Induced Scalarization in Extended Scalar-Tensor Theories,

    D. D. Doneva and S. S. Yazadjiev, “New Gauss-Bonnet Black Holes with Curvature-Induced Scalarization in Extended Scalar-Tensor Theories,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 120, no. 13, p. 131103, 2018

    2018

  48. [55]

    Breaking black-hole uniqueness at supermassive scales,

    A. Eichhorn, P. G. S. Fernandes, A. Held, and H. O. Silva, “Breaking black-hole uniqueness at supermassive scales,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 42, no. 10, p. 105006, 2025

    2025

  49. [56]

    Probing su- permassive black hole scalarization with pulsar timing arrays,

    C. Smarra, L. Capuano, and A. Kuntz, “Probing su- permassive black hole scalarization with pulsar timing arrays,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 112, no. 6, p. 064005, 2025. 17

    2025

  50. [57]

    Su- permassive black hole scalarization and effective field theory,

    F. Thaalba, P. G. S. Fernandes, and T. P. Sotiriou, “Su- permassive black hole scalarization and effective field theory,” 6 2025

    2025

  51. [58]

    Spin-induced black hole spontaneous scalarization,

    A. Dima, E. Barausse, N. Franchini, and T. P. Sotiriou, “Spin-induced black hole spontaneous scalarization,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 125, no. 23, p. 231101, 2020

    2020

  52. [59]

    Spontaneous scalarization of black holes and compact stars from a Gauss-Bonnet coupling,

    H. O. Silva, J. Sakstein, L. Gualtieri, T. P. Sotiriou, and E. Berti, “Spontaneous scalarization of black holes and compact stars from a Gauss-Bonnet coupling,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 120, no. 13, p. 131104, 2018

    2018

  53. [60]

    Beyond the sponta- neous scalarization: New fully nonlinear mechanism for the formation of scalarized black holes and its dynami- cal development,

    D. D. Doneva and S. S. Yazadjiev, “Beyond the sponta- neous scalarization: New fully nonlinear mechanism for the formation of scalarized black holes and its dynami- cal development,”Physical Review D, 2022

    2022

  54. [61]

    Spin-induced scalarized black holes,

    C. A. R. Herdeiro, E. Radu, H. O. Silva, T. P. Sotiriou, and N. Yunes, “Spin-induced scalarized black holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 126, no. 1, p. 011103, 2021

    2021

  55. [62]

    Coalescence of binary neutron stars in a scalar- tensor theory of gravity,

    M. Shibata, K. Taniguchi, H. Okawa, and A. Buo- nanno, “Coalescence of binary neutron stars in a scalar- tensor theory of gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 89, no. 8, p. 084005, 2014

    2014

  56. [63]

    Scalarization,

    D. D. Doneva, F. M. Ramazanoğlu, H. O. Silva, T. P. Sotiriou, and S. S. Yazadjiev, “Scalarization,” 2022

    2022

  57. [64]

    Pro- jected constraints on scalarization with gravitational waves from neutron star binaries,

    L. Sampson, N. Yunes, N. Cornish, M. Ponce, E. Ba- rausse, A. Klein, C. Palenzuela, and L. Lehner, “Pro- jected constraints on scalarization with gravitational waves from neutron star binaries,”Physical Review D, vol. 90, 2014

    2014

  58. [65]

    Neutron-star mergers in scalar-tensor theories of grav- ity,

    E. Barausse, C. Palenzuela, M. Ponce, and L. Lehner, “Neutron-star mergers in scalar-tensor theories of grav- ity,”Physical Review D, vol. 87, Apr. 2013

    2013

  59. [66]

    Effective action model of dynamically scalarizing binary neutron stars,

    N. Sennett, L. Shao, and J. Steinhoff, “Effective action model of dynamically scalarizing binary neutron stars,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 96, no. 8, p. 084019, 2017

    2017

  60. [67]

    Dynamical scalarization of neutron stars in scalar- tensor gravity theories,

    C. Palenzuela, E. Barausse, M. Ponce, and L. Lehner, “Dynamical scalarization of neutron stars in scalar- tensor gravity theories,”Physical Review D, 2014

    2014

  61. [68]

    Quasiequilibrium sequences of binary neutron stars undergoing dynamical scalarization,

    K. Taniguchi, M. Shibata, and A. Buonanno, “Quasiequilibrium sequences of binary neutron stars undergoing dynamical scalarization,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 91, no. 2, p. 024033, 2015

    2015

  62. [70]

    Nonlinear curvature effects in gravitational waves from inspiralling black hole binaries,

    B. Shiralilou, T. Hinderer, S. Nissanke, N. Ortiz, and H. Witek, “Nonlinear curvature effects in gravitational waves from inspiralling black hole binaries,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 103, no. 12, p. L121503, 2021

    2021

  63. [71]

    Theory-agnostic framework for dynamical scalariza- tion of compact binaries,

    M. Khalil, N. Sennett, J. Steinhoff, and A. Buonanno, “Theory-agnostic framework for dynamical scalariza- tion of compact binaries,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 100, no. 12, p. 124013, 2019

    2019

  64. [72]

    Dynamical scalar- ization during neutron star mergers in scalar-Gauss- Bonnet theory,

    H.-J. Kuan, A. T.-L. Lam, D. D. Doneva, S. S. Yazad- jiev, M. Shibata, and K. Kiuchi, “Dynamical scalar- ization during neutron star mergers in scalar-Gauss- Bonnet theory,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 108, no. 6, p. 063033, 2023

    2023

  65. [73]

    Dynamical scalarization in Schwarzschild binary inspirals,

    F.-L. Julié, “Dynamical scalarization in Schwarzschild binary inspirals,” 2023

    2023

  66. [74]

    Numerical binary black hole mergers in dynamical Chern-Simons gravity: Scalar field,

    M. Okounkova, L. C. Stein, M. A. Scheel, and D. A. Hemberger, “Numerical binary black hole mergers in dynamical Chern-Simons gravity: Scalar field,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 96, no. 4, p. 044020, 2017

    2017

  67. [75]

    Post-Newtoniangravitationalandscalar waves in scalar-Gauss–Bonnet gravity,

    B. Shiralilou, T. Hinderer, S. M. Nissanke, N. Ortiz, andH.Witek, “Post-Newtoniangravitationalandscalar waves in scalar-Gauss–Bonnet gravity,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 39, no. 3, p. 035002, 2022

    2022

  68. [76]

    Post-Newtonian dynam- ics and black hole thermodynamics in Einstein-scalar- Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    F.-L. Julié and E. Berti, “Post-Newtonian dynam- ics and black hole thermodynamics in Einstein-scalar- Gauss-Bonnet gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 100, no. 10, p. 104061, 2019

    2019

  69. [77]

    Post-Newtonian, Quasi-Circular Binary Inspirals in Quadratic Modified Gravity,

    K. Yagi, L. C. Stein, N. Yunes, and T. Tanaka, “Post-Newtonian, Quasi-Circular Binary Inspirals in Quadratic Modified Gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 85, p. 064022, 2012. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 93, 029902 (2016)]

    2012

  70. [78]

    Mea- suring the ringdown scalar polarization of gravitational waves in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    T. Evstafyeva, M. Agathos, and J. L. Ripley, “Mea- suring the ringdown scalar polarization of gravitational waves in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 107, no. 12, p. 124010, 2023

    2023

  71. [79]

    Dy- namical Descalarization in Binary Black Hole Mergers,

    H. O. Silva, H. Witek, M. Elley, and N. Yunes, “Dy- namical Descalarization in Binary Black Hole Mergers,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 127, no. 3, p. 031101, 2021

    2021

  72. [80]

    Spin- induced dynamical scalarization, descalarization, and stealthness in scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity during a black hole coalescence,

    M. Elley, H. O. Silva, H. Witek, and N. Yunes, “Spin- induced dynamical scalarization, descalarization, and stealthness in scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity during a black hole coalescence,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 106, no. 4, p. 044018, 2022

    2022

  73. [81]

    Dynamical descalarization with a jump during a black hole merger,

    D. D. Doneva, A. Vañó-Viñuales, and S. S. Yazadjiev, “Dynamical descalarization with a jump during a black hole merger,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 106, no. 6, p. L061502, 2022

    2022

  74. [82]

    Dynamics of Spon- taneous Black Hole Scalarization and Mergers in Einstein-Scalar-Gauss-Bonnet Gravity,

    W. E. East and J. L. Ripley, “Dynamics of Spon- taneous Black Hole Scalarization and Mergers in Einstein-Scalar-Gauss-Bonnet Gravity,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 127, no. 10, p. 101102, 2021

    2021

  75. [83]

    Well-Posed Formulation of Scalar-Tensor Effective Field Theory,

    Á. D. Kovács and H. S. Reall, “Well-Posed Formulation of Scalar-Tensor Effective Field Theory,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 124, no. 22, p. 221101, 2020

    2020

  76. [84]

    Well-posed formula- tion of Lovelock and Horndeski theories,

    Á. D. Kovács and H. S. Reall, “Well-posed formula- tion of Lovelock and Horndeski theories,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 101, no. 12, p. 124003, 2020

    2020

  77. [85]

    Evolution of Einstein- scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity using a modified harmonic formulation,

    W. E. East and J. L. Ripley, “Evolution of Einstein- scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity using a modified harmonic formulation,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 103, no. 4, p. 044040, 2021

    2021

  78. [86]

    GRFolres: A code for modified gravity simula- tions in strong gravity,

    L. Aresté Saló, S. E. Brady, K. Clough, D. Doneva, T. Evstafyeva, P. Figueras, T. França, L. Rossi, and S. Yao, “GRFolres: A code for modified gravity simula- tions in strong gravity,”J. Open Source Softw., vol. 9, no. 98, p. 6369, 2024. 18

    2024

  79. [87]

    Binaryneutronstarmerg- ers in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    W.E.EastandF.Pretorius, “Binaryneutronstarmerg- ers in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 106, no. 10, p. 104055, 2022

    2022

  80. [88]

    Well- Posedness of the Four-Derivative Scalar-Tensor Theory of Gravity in Singularity Avoiding Coordinates,

    L. Aresté Saló, K. Clough, and P. Figueras, “Well- Posedness of the Four-Derivative Scalar-Tensor Theory of Gravity in Singularity Avoiding Coordinates,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 129, no. 26, p. 261104, 2022

    2022

  81. [89]

    Punc- ture gauge formulation for Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet grav- ity and four-derivative scalar-tensor theories in d+1 spacetime dimensions,

    L. Aresté Saló, K. Clough, and P. Figueras, “Punc- ture gauge formulation for Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet grav- ity and four-derivative scalar-tensor theories in d+1 spacetime dimensions,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 108, no. 8, p. 084018, 2023

    2023

  82. [90]

    Signatures from metastable oppositely- chargedblackholebinariesinscalarGauss-Bonnetgrav- ity,

    G. Laraet al., “Signatures from metastable oppositely- chargedblackholebinariesinscalarGauss-Bonnetgrav- ity,” 5 2025

    2025

  83. [91]

    Nonlinear studies of binary black hole mergers in Einstein-scalar- Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    M. Corman, J. L. Ripley, and W. E. East, “Nonlinear studies of binary black hole mergers in Einstein-scalar- Gauss-Bonnet gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 107, no. 2, p. 024014, 2023

    2023

  84. [92]

    Black hole-neutron star mergers in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    M. Corman and W. E. East, “Black hole-neutron star mergers in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 110, no. 8, p. 084065, 2024

    2024

  85. [93]

    Challenges in the nonlinear evo- lution of unequal mass binaries in scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    L. Aresté Saló, D. D. Doneva, K. Clough, P. Figueras, and S. S. Yazadjiev, “Challenges in the nonlinear evo- lution of unequal mass binaries in scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 112, no. 8, p. 084022, 2025

    2025

  86. [94]

    Thermody- namics sheds light on black hole dynamics,

    M. Cárdenas, F.-L. Julié, and N. Deruelle, “Thermody- namics sheds light on black hole dynamics,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 97, no. 12, p. 124021, 2018

    2018

  87. [95]

    Black hole binaries in shift-symmetric Einstein-scalar-Gauss- Bonnet gravity experience a slower merger phase,

    M. Corman, L. Aresté Saló, and K. Clough, “Black hole binaries in shift-symmetric Einstein-scalar-Gauss- Bonnet gravity experience a slower merger phase,” 11 2025

    2025

  88. [96]

    Radial perturbations of the scalar- ized Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet black holes,

    J. L. Blázquez-Salcedo, D. D. Doneva, J. Kunz, and S. S. Yazadjiev, “Radial perturbations of the scalar- ized Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet black holes,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 98, no. 8, p. 084011, 2018

    2018

  89. [97]

    On the motion of hairy black holes in Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton theories,

    F.-L. Julié, “On the motion of hairy black holes in Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton theories,”JCAP, vol. 01, p. 026, 2018

    2018

  90. [98]

    The Dy- namics of general relativity,

    R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, “The Dy- namics of general relativity,”Gen. Rel. Grav., vol. 40, pp. 1997–2027, 2008

    1997

  91. [99]

    Black hole sensitivities in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet grav- ity,

    F.-L. Julié, H. O. Silva, E. Berti, and N. Yunes, “Black hole sensitivities in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet grav- ity,”Phys. Rev. D, 2022

    2022

  92. [100]

    Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,

    R. M. Wald, “Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. R3427–R3431, 1993

    1993

  93. [101]

    Some properties of Noether chargeandaproposalfordynamicalblackholeentropy,

    V. Iyer and R. M. Wald, “Some properties of Noether chargeandaproposalfordynamicalblackholeentropy,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 50, pp. 846–864, 1994

    1994

  94. [102]

    Calibration of Moving PunctureSimulations,

    B. Brügmann, J. A. González, M. Hannam, S. Husa, U. Sperhake, and W. Tichy, “Calibration of Moving PunctureSimulations,”Phys. Rev. D,vol.77, p.024027, 2008

    2008

  95. [103]

    GRChombo: An adaptable numer- ical relativity code for fundamental physics,

    T. Andradeet al., “GRChombo: An adaptable numer- ical relativity code for fundamental physics,”J. Open Source Softw., vol. 6, no. 68, p. 3703, 2021

    2021

  96. [104]

    Lessons for adaptive mesh re- finement in numerical relativity,

    M. Radia, U. Sperhake, A. Drew, K. Clough, P. Figueras, E. A. Lim, J. L. Ripley, J. C. Aurrekoetxea, T. França, and T. Helfer, “Lessons for adaptive mesh re- finement in numerical relativity,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 39, no. 13, p. 135006, 2022

    2022

  97. [105]

    A Single- domain spectral method for black hole puncture data,

    M. Ansorg, B. Brügmann, and W. Tichy, “A Single- domain spectral method for black hole puncture data,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 70, p. 064011, 2004

    2004

  98. [106]

    Gravitational waves frommergingcompactbinaries: Howaccuratelycanone extract the binary’s parameters from the inspiral wave form?,

    C. Cutler and E. E. Flanagan, “Gravitational waves frommergingcompactbinaries: Howaccuratelycanone extract the binary’s parameters from the inspiral wave form?,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 49, pp. 2658–2697, 1994

    1994

  99. [107]

    Solving the initial conditions problem for modified gravity theories,

    S. E. Brady, L. Aresté Saló, K. Clough, P. Figueras, and A. P. S., “Solving the initial conditions problem for modified gravity theories,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 108, no. 10, p. 104022, 2023

    2023

  100. [108]

    Qua- sistationary hair for binary black hole initial data in scalar Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    P. J. Nee, G. Lara, H. P. Pfeiffer, and N. L. Vu, “Qua- sistationary hair for binary black hole initial data in scalar Gauss-Bonnet gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 2, p. 024061, 2025

    2025

  101. [109]

    Inspiral- merger-ringdown waveforms in Einstein-scalar-Gauss- Bonnet gravity within the effective-one-body formal- ism,

    F.-L. Julié, L. Pompili, and A. Buonanno, “Inspiral- merger-ringdown waveforms in Einstein-scalar-Gauss- Bonnet gravity within the effective-one-body formal- ism,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 2, p. 024016, 2025

    2025

  102. [110]

    Bayes Factors,

    R. E. Kass and A. E. Raftery, “Bayes Factors,”J. Am. Statist. Assoc., vol. 90, no. 430, pp. 773–795, 1995

    1995

  103. [111]

    Post- circular expansion of eccentric binary inspirals: Fourier- domain waveforms in the stationary phase approxima- tion,

    N. Yunes, K. G. Arun, E. Berti, and C. M. Will, “Post- circular expansion of eccentric binary inspirals: Fourier- domain waveforms in the stationary phase approxima- tion,”Physical Review D, vol. 80, Oct. 2009

    2009

  104. [112]

    Post-Newtonian phase accuracy require- ments for stellar black hole binaries with LISA,

    A. Mangiagli, A. Klein, A. Sesana, E. Barausse, and M. Colpi, “Post-Newtonian phase accuracy require- ments for stellar black hole binaries with LISA,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 99, no. 6, p. 064056, 2019

    2019

  105. [113]

    Jeffreys,The Theory of Probability

    H. Jeffreys,The Theory of Probability. Oxford Classic Texts in the Physical Sciences, 1939

    1939

  106. [115]

    Gwtc-4.0: Pop- ulation properties of merging compact binaries,

    R. Abbott, H. Abe, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, N. Adhikari, R. X. Adhikari,et al., “Gwtc-4.0: Pop- ulation properties of merging compact binaries,”The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 960, no. 1, p. 16, 2025

    2025

  107. [116]

    Theoretical Physics Im- plications of Gravitational Wave Observation with Fu- ture Detectors,

    K. Chamberlain and N. Yunes, “Theoretical Physics Im- plications of Gravitational Wave Observation with Fu- ture Detectors,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 96, no. 8, p. 084039, 2017

    2017

  108. [117]

    GRTresna: An open-source code to solve the initial data constraints in numerical relativity,

    J. C. Aurrekoetxeaet al., “GRTresna: An open-source code to solve the initial data constraints in numerical relativity,” 1 2025

    2025

  109. [2020]

    652, C4 (2021)]

    [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.