arxiv: 2603.03077 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-03 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · astro-ph.EP· astro-ph.GA· astro-ph.SR

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Nemesis: A Multi-Scale, Multi-Physics Algorithm for Astrophysics

Erwan Hochart , Simon Portegies Zwart

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 16:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.EPastro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR

keywords multi-scale simulationN-body integrationstar clustersplanetary systemsvon Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effectcomputational performanceastrophysical algorithm

0 comments

The pith

Nemesis produces results indistinguishable from direct N-body code Ph4 at both global and local scales for star clusters containing planetary systems.

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

The paper presents an updated multi-scale multi-physics algorithm called Nemesis that couples global cluster dynamics with local planetary integrations. It validates this approach through direct comparisons showing identical outcomes to the Ph4 direct N-body code for both large-scale cluster evolution and small-scale planetary orbits. The algorithm also reproduces the von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effect without deviation. A reader would care because the method maintains accuracy while offering better computational scaling for systems that combine vastly different spatial and temporal scales.

Core claim

Nemesis is a multi-scale algorithm that synchronizes global N-body evolution of star clusters with local integrations of embedded planetary systems at fixed intervals delta t_nem. In validation runs it produces results indistinguishable from the direct N-body code Ph4 at both global and local scales, and it captures the von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effect at the same fidelity. Wall-clock time scales roughly as the inverse square root of the synchronization interval, remains constant when the number of cores meets or exceeds the number of planetary systems, and increases at most linearly beyond that point.

What carries the argument

The synchronization interval delta t_nem that couples the global N-body cluster evolution to the local planetary-system integrations.

If this is right

Star-cluster simulations containing planetary systems match direct N-body results at both global and local scales.
The von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effect is reproduced at the same level of accuracy as in direct integration.
Wall-clock time decreases proportionally to the inverse square root of the synchronization interval.
Runtime stays constant when available cores equal or exceed the number of planetary systems.
Runtime increases linearly at worst when the number of systems exceeds available cores.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The observed scaling could enable simulations of larger star clusters with planets than pure direct N-body methods currently allow.
Modular coupling of additional physics such as hydrodynamics could extend the approach to protoplanetary disks or other multi-physics problems within clusters.
If synchronization errors remain negligible, the method offers a practical route to parameter-space studies of long-term cluster evolution that include planetary dynamics.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen synchronization interval between global and local scales introduces no systematic errors visible only in longer or higher-resolution runs.

What would settle it

A simulation run with a substantially smaller synchronization interval or over a much longer time span that produces measurable divergence from Ph4 results in planetary orbital elements or cluster structural parameters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.03077 by Erwan Hochart, Simon Portegies Zwart.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Nemesis workflow. star_evol is a parameter in Nemesis toggling on or off stellar evolution. Communication between codes is internally handled by AMUSE via channels. Orange boxes represent the setup and termination of the simulation, red boxes indicate steps where work is offloaded to external codes, and blue boxes denote tasks handed back to Python for manipulation of Nemesis-structured data. A movie showi… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Evolution of the simulation’s energy error in time. allows for collision detection and contains a symplectic integrator solving tides in its library (TIDYMESS, Boekholt & Correia (2023)), this is omitted here to allow scrutiny on Nemesis over longer times. 3.3. Computational Scaling: Nemesis Scaling Relations The last set of runs investigates the computational scaling relations of Nemesis. The simulated … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Bottom: Cumulative distribution function of asteroid eccentricities after tend = 0.1 Myr. Top: Residuals in distributions between Nemesis and Ph4, computed as ∆y(e) = (yNem(e) − yPh4(e)). In the purely direct N-body computation, Ph4 exhibits a steady drift in energy error, which over longer timescales will yield unreliable results, especially for quickly evolving systems such as planetary systems. Note th… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Diagram illustrating how children on wide orbits are not as well resolved in Nemesis since it manages external interactions via correction kicks applied every bridge time-step (δtnem). As a result, the outer planet (blue) is diverted along the black trajectory. Meanwhile, a direct N-body integrator computes interactions at every internal time-step (δt). With better resolution of the close encounter, the p… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The total inclination of the triple system (top) and the inner binary’s eccentricity (bottom) over time. The system comprises of an inner binary (M1 = 1 M⊙, M2 = 40 MJup) perturbed by an outer binary of mass M = 40 MJup. The inset shows the oscillation in (1 − ein) for the first 0.12 Myr. A cycle is found to be 0.821 Myr. The y-axis corresponds to ∆(1 − e) = 3 × 10−3 , showing the extent which Nemesis ca… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Top: Nemesis bridge time step δtnem vs. computation time for an identical cluster containing 20 subsystems. Blue points consider a cluster with density ρ ∼ 103 M⊙ pc−3 , while red and purple points ρ ∼ 102 M⊙ pc−3 . Dashed lines are curves described by the exponent α = −0.5. Bottom: Number of children Nchd vs. time taken to simulate an identical cluster to 100 kyr, tsim [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

In this work, an updated version of the multi-scale, multi-physics algorithm, Nemesis which makes use of the Astrophysical Multipurpose Software Environment (AMUSE). The algorithm is formally introduced and validated. A suite of simulations is run to assess its performance in simulating star clusters containing planetary systems, its ability to capture the von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effect, and its computational scalability. Nemesis is found to yield indistinguishable results in both the global and local scales when compared with the direct N-body code Ph4. The same conclusion is found when analysing its ability to capture the von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effect. When analysing its computational performance, the wall-clock time scales roughly as $t_{\rm sim \propto 1/ \sqrt{\delta t_{\rm nem}}$ where $\delta t_{\rm nem}$ represents the time synchronisation between the global and local scales. When changing the number of planetary systems, the wall-clock time remains unchanged as long as the number of available cores exceeds the number of systems. Beyond this, it's found that at worst, the computational time increases linearly with the number of excess systems. The method introduced here can find it's use in numerous domains of astronomy thanks to its flexibility and modularity, from simulating protoplanetary disks in star clusters to binary black holes in the galactic center.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Nemesis is a practical update to an existing multi-scale coupling method in AMUSE for star clusters with planets, but the validation lacks the quantitative metrics needed to back the indistinguishability claim.

read the letter

The paper presents an updated Nemesis algorithm that couples a global cluster integrator with local planetary integrators inside AMUSE, synchronizing at fixed intervals delta t_nem. It reports that the results match the direct N-body code Ph4 on both global cluster scales and local planetary scales, including vZLK captures, while wall-clock time scales roughly as 1 over square root of delta t_nem and stays flat until the number of systems exceeds available cores, after which it grows linearly at worst. The modularity for other problems like disks or black-hole binaries is also noted. What the work does well is show a usable implementation with external benchmarking against Ph4 and clear performance numbers for the scaling regimes that matter in practice. Those scaling results and the linear behavior beyond core count are the parts a user could actually apply tomorrow. The comparisons to an independent code are the right kind of check. The soft spots sit in the validation. The abstract calls the results indistinguishable without giving energy errors, orbital element deviations, statistical measures, or any range of delta t_nem values tested. There are also no longer or higher-resolution runs to check whether synchronization errors accumulate. The reported scaling law is interesting but sits on top of that unquantified coupling, so the central claim rests on an assumption that has not been stress-tested in the text. This is an incremental update rather than a first derivation of the multi-scale idea. The paper is aimed at computational astrophysicists who already use AMUSE and need to mix cluster and planetary scales without running everything at the smallest timestep. A reader working on similar problems would get value from the implementation choices and the performance curves. It deserves peer review. The method is grounded enough and the external comparison is useful, but referees will need the missing error metrics and convergence checks before the indistinguishability statement can be taken at face value.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents an updated Nemesis algorithm implemented in the AMUSE framework for multi-scale, multi-physics astrophysical simulations. It validates the method on star clusters containing planetary systems by direct comparison to the Ph4 N-body integrator, demonstrates capture of the von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai mechanism, and reports wall-clock scaling t_sim ∝ 1/√δt_nem together with linear scaling once the number of planetary systems exceeds available cores.

Significance. If the central validation claims hold under quantitative scrutiny, Nemesis would supply a modular, extensible tool for coupled global-cluster and local-planetary dynamics that is already benchmarked against an independent direct integrator. The reported scaling and AMUSE-based modularity are practical strengths for applications ranging from protoplanetary disks in clusters to compact-object dynamics.

major comments (3)

[§3–4] Validation sections (abstract and §3–4): the repeated claim that Nemesis yields 'indistinguishable results' from Ph4 on both global and local scales is unsupported by any quantitative metric (maximum relative energy error, RMS orbital-element deviation, Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics, or similar). Without these numbers and the precise definition of 'indistinguishable,' the central correctness assertion cannot be evaluated.
[§4] Synchronization and scaling analysis (§4): the reported t_sim ∝ 1/√δt_nem scaling and the assertion that δt_nem introduces no systematic errors rest on a single (unspecified) baseline value of δt_nem. No convergence tests varying δt_nem over at least an order of magnitude, no longer integration times, and no higher-N runs are described; secular accumulation of coupling errors would appear only in such tests.
[§3] vZLK capture test: the statement that 'the same conclusion is found' for the von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effect is given without any tabulated orbital-element evolution, period statistics, or direct overlay against Ph4, leaving the local-scale fidelity claim unverified.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: 'it's' should read 'its' in the final sentence.
[§2] Notation: δt_nem is introduced without an explicit equation or units; a short definition in §2 would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate quantitative metrics, additional convergence tests, and supporting data for the vZLK analysis.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§3–4] Validation sections (abstract and §3–4): the repeated claim that Nemesis yields 'indistinguishable results' from Ph4 on both global and local scales is unsupported by any quantitative metric (maximum relative energy error, RMS orbital-element deviation, Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics, or similar). Without these numbers and the precise definition of 'indistinguishable,' the central correctness assertion cannot be evaluated.

Authors: We agree that the claim of 'indistinguishable results' requires quantitative support beyond visual inspection of figures. The original manuscript presented agreement through direct comparison plots but did not report explicit error metrics. In the revised version we will add maximum relative energy errors, RMS orbital-element deviations, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics on the relevant distributions, together with a clear definition of the threshold used to describe results as indistinguishable. revision: yes
Referee: [§4] Synchronization and scaling analysis (§4): the reported t_sim ∝ 1/√δt_nem scaling and the assertion that δt_nem introduces no systematic errors rest on a single (unspecified) baseline value of δt_nem. No convergence tests varying δt_nem over at least an order of magnitude, no longer integration times, and no higher-N runs are described; secular accumulation of coupling errors would appear only in such tests.

Authors: The referee correctly notes that the scaling relation and error-free assertion were shown for a limited set of δt_nem values. We will expand the analysis in the revised manuscript to include convergence tests with δt_nem varied over at least an order of magnitude, longer integration times, and higher-N runs to confirm the absence of secular coupling errors and to substantiate the reported scaling. revision: yes
Referee: [§3] vZLK capture test: the statement that 'the same conclusion is found' for the von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai effect is given without any tabulated orbital-element evolution, period statistics, or direct overlay against Ph4, leaving the local-scale fidelity claim unverified.

Authors: We accept that the vZLK section would benefit from explicit tabulated data. The revised manuscript will include tables of orbital-element evolution, period statistics, and direct overlays or quantitative comparisons with Ph4 to verify the local-scale fidelity of the captured mechanism. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; validation relies on external Ph4 benchmark and empirical scaling observations.

full rationale

The paper presents Nemesis as an updated multi-scale algorithm in AMUSE and validates it through direct comparisons to the independent Ph4 N-body code, reporting indistinguishable results on global and local scales plus vZLK capture. The wall-clock scaling t_sim ∝ 1/√δt_nem is stated as an observed performance characteristic from timing tests, not a derived prediction obtained by fitting parameters to the target quantities. No equations, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations reduce the reported indistinguishability or scaling to quantities defined only within the present work. The central claims rest on external code benchmarks rather than internal fits or prior-author uniqueness theorems, rendering the derivation chain self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the correctness of the AMUSE framework for coupling independent codes and on the premise that a single tunable synchronization interval suffices to keep global and local solutions consistent.

free parameters (1)

delta t_nem
Synchronization time step between global and local scales; its value controls both accuracy and the reported 1/sqrt scaling of wall-clock time.

axioms (1)

domain assumption AMUSE provides accurate, stable integration when different physics modules are coupled at user-chosen time intervals.
The validation against Ph4 implicitly assumes the underlying AMUSE infrastructure does not introduce its own artifacts.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5558 in / 1256 out tokens · 34552 ms · 2026-05-15T16:36:35.210152+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

wall-clock time scales roughly as t_sim ∝ 1/√δt_nem where δt_nem represents the time synchronisation between the global and local scales
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

correction kicks ... F_corr.par,i = Σ (Σ F_k − F_par,j)

What do these tags mean?

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

[1]

Aarseth, S. J. & Zare, K. 1974, Celestial Mechanics, 10, 185

work page 1974
[2]

& Cohen, L

Ahmad, A. & Cohen, L. 1973, Journal of Computational Physics, 12, 389

work page 1973
[3]

Anderson, T. W. & Darling, D. A. 1954, Journal of the American Statistical As- sociation, 49, 765 Arca Sedda, M., Amaro Seoane, P., & Chen, X. 2021, A&A, 652, A54

work page 1954
[4]

Bailer-Jones, C. A. L. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 1163

work page 2011
[5]

& Hut, P

Barnes, J. & Hut, P. 1986, Nature, 324, 446

work page 1986
[6]

& Portegies Zwart, S

Boekholt, T. & Portegies Zwart, S. 2015, Computational Astrophysics and Cos- mology, 2, 2

work page 2015
[7]

Boekholt, T. C. N. & Correia, A. C. M. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 2885

work page 2023
[8]

Boekholt, T. C. N., Moerman, A., & Portegies Zwart, S. F. 2021, Phys. Rev. D, 104, 083020

work page 2021
[9]

X., Kouwenhoven, M

Cai, M. X., Kouwenhoven, M. B. N., Portegies Zwart, S. F., & Spurzem, R. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4337

work page 2017
[10]

1979, ApJ, 234, 1036 Cramér, H

Cohn, H. 1979, ApJ, 234, 1036 Cramér, H. 1928, Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 1928, 13

work page 1979
[11]

Davis, M., Hut, P., & Muller, R. A. 1984, Nature, 308, 715

work page 1984
[12]

& Hut, P

Dejonghe, H. & Hut, P. 1986, in Lecture Notes in Physics, ed. P. Hut & S. L. W

work page 1986
[13]

267, 212 Fernández, J

McMillan, V ol. 267, 212 Fernández, J. A., Gallardo, T., & Brunini, A. 2004, Icarus, 172, 372

work page 2004
[14]

& Leigh, N

Fragione, G. & Leigh, N. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 5160

work page 2018
[15]

2007, PASJ, 59, 1095

Fujii, M., Iwasawa, M., Funato, Y ., & Makino, J. 2007, PASJ, 59, 1095

work page 2007
[16]

1998, MNRAS, 298, 1239

Giersz, M. 1998, MNRAS, 298, 1239

work page 1998
[17]

1996, Parallel Computing, 22, 789

Gropp, W., Lusk, E., Doss, N., & Skjellum, A. 1996, Parallel Computing, 22, 789

work page 1996
[18]

R., Millman, K

Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357

work page 2020
[19]

Heggie, D. C. 2003, in IAU Symposium, V ol. 208, Astrophysical Supercomput- ing using Particle Simulations, ed. J. Makino & P. Hut, 81 Article number, page 10 of 11 E. Hochart and S. Portegies Zwart:Nemesis: A Multi-Scale, Multi-Physics Algorithm for Astrophysics Hénon, M. H. 1971, Ap&SS, 14, 151

work page 2003
[20]

1990, ApJ, 356, 359

Hernquist, L. 1990, ApJ, 356, 359

work page 1990
[21]

Hills, J. G. 1980, ApJ, 235, 986

work page 1980
[22]

Holman, M. J. & Wiegert, P. A. 1999, AJ, 117, 621

work page 1999
[23]

Huang, S., Portegies Zwart, S., & Wilhelm, M. J. C. 2024, A&A, 689, A338

work page 2024
[24]

Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90

work page 2007
[25]

2015, Computational Astro- physics and Cosmology, 2, 6

Iwasawa, M., Portegies Zwart, S., & Makino, J. 2015, Computational Astro- physics and Cosmology, 2, 6

work page 2015
[26]

D., Cushing, M

Kirkpatrick, J. D., Cushing, M. C., Gelino, C. R., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 19

work page 2011
[27]

& Ida, S

Kokubo, E. & Ida, S. 2002, ApJ, 581, 666

work page 2002
[28]

2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

work page 2001
[29]

Lada, C. J. & Lada, E. A. 2003, ARA&A, 41, 57

work page 2003
[30]

J., Lombardi, M., & Alves, J

Lada, C. J., Lombardi, M., & Alves, J. F. 2010, ApJ, 724, 687

work page 2010
[31]

Lidov, M. L. 1962, Planet. Space Sci., 9, 719

work page 1962
[32]

& Aarseth, S

Makino, J. & Aarseth, S. J. 1992, PASJ, 44, 141

work page 1992
[33]

H., et al

Mannerkoski, M., Rawlings, A., Johansson, P. H., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 4062

work page 2023
[34]

2012, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol

McMillan, S., Portegies Zwart, S., van Elteren, A., & Whitehead, A. 2012, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 453, Advances in Computational Astrophysics: Methods, Tools, and Outcome, ed. R. Capuzzo-

work page 2012
[35]

& Nagai, R

Miyamoto, M. & Nagai, R. 1975, PASJ, 27, 533

work page 1975
[36]

J., Davies, M

Mustill, A. J., Davies, M. B., & Johansen, A. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 3000

work page 2017
[37]

M., & Rasio, F

Naoz, S., Farr, W. M., & Rasio, F. A. 2012, ApJ, 754, L36

work page 2012
[38]

F., Frenk, C

Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493

work page 1997
[39]

R., Portegies Zwart, S

Nelemans, G., Yungelson, L. R., Portegies Zwart, S. F., & Verbunt, F. 2001, A&A, 365, 491

work page 2001
[40]

1918, Nachr

Noether, E. 1918, Nachr. D. KÃ¶nig. Gesellsch. D. Wiss. Zu GÃ¶ttingen, 235

work page 1918
[41]

Oort, J. H. 1950, Bull. Astron. Inst. Netherlands, 11, 91 Öpik, E. 1932, Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 67, 169

work page 1950
[42]

2011, ApJS, 192, 3

Paxton, B., Bildsten, L., Dotter, A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 3

work page 2011
[43]

I., Jänes, J., & Portegies Zwart, S

Pelupessy, F. I., Jänes, J., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2012, New A, 17, 711

work page 2012
[44]

I., van Elteren, A., de Vries, N., et al

Pelupessy, F. I., van Elteren, A., de Vries, N., et al. 2013, A&A, 557, A84

work page 2013
[45]

Plummer, H. C. 1911, MNRAS, 71, 460 Poincaré, H. 1891, Bulletin Astronomique, Serie I, 8, 12 Poincaré, H. 1892, Les méthodes nouvelles de la mécanique céleste (Paris: Gauthier-Villars et fils) Portegies Zwart, S. & McMillan, S. 2018, Astrophysical Recipes; The art of AMUSE (IOP Publishing) Portegies Zwart, S., McMillan, S., Harfst, S., et al. 2009, New A,...

work page 1911
[46]

H., et al

Rantala, A., Pihajoki, P., Johansson, P. H., et al. 2017, ApJ, 840, 53

work page 2017
[47]

& Liu, S

Rein, H. & Liu, S. F. 2012, A&A, 537, A128

work page 2012
[48]

Safronov, V . S. 1960, Annales d’Astrophysique, 23, 979 Saz Ulibarrena, V . & Portegies Zwart, S. 2025, Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulations, 145, 108723

work page 1960
[49]

& Hart, M

Spitzer, Jr., L. & Hart, M. H. 1971, ApJ, 164, 399

work page 1971
[50]

2005, MNRAS, 364, 948

Spurzem, R., Giersz, M., Takahashi, K., & Ernst, A. 2005, MNRAS, 364, 948

work page 2005
[51]

& Kustaanheimo, P

Stiefel, E. & Kustaanheimo, P. 1965, Journal für die reine und angewandte Math- ematik, 218, 204

work page 1965
[52]

& Toomre, J

Toomre, A. & Toomre, J. 1972, ApJ, 178, 623

work page 1972
[53]

2012, A&A, 546, A70

Toonen, S., Nelemans, G., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2012, A&A, 546, A70

work page 2012
[54]

2015, ApJ, 807, 157 van Elteren, A., Pelupessy, I., & Portegies Zwart, S

Tremaine, S. 2015, ApJ, 807, 157 van Elteren, A., Pelupessy, I., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2014, Philosophical Trans- actions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 372, 20130385 van Elteren, A., Portegies Zwart, S., Pelupessy, I., Cai, M. X., & McMillan, S. L. W. 2019, A&A, 624, A120

work page 2015
[55]

1967, Physical Review, 159, 98 von Zeipel, H

Verlet, L. 1967, Physical Review, 159, 98 von Zeipel, H. 1910, Astronomische Nachrichten, 183, 345

work page 1967
[56]

2020, MNRAS, 497, 536

Wang, L., Iwasawa, M., Nitadori, K., & Makino, J. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 536

work page 2020
[57]

Whitmire, D. P. & Jackson, A. A. 1984, Nature, 308, 713

work page 1984
[58]

Wilhelm, M. J. C., Portegies Zwart, S., Cournoyer-Cloutier, C., et al. 2023, MN- RAS, 520, 5331

work page 2023
[59]

J., Haworth, T

Winter, A. J., Haworth, T. J., Coleman, G. A. L., & Nayakshin, S. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 4287

work page 2022
[60]

& Holman, M

Wisdom, J. & Holman, M. 1991, AJ, 102, 1528

work page 1991
[61]

2019, ApJ, 871, 91 Article number, page 11 of 11

Zevin, M., Samsing, J., Rodriguez, C., Haster, C.-J., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2019, ApJ, 871, 91 Article number, page 11 of 11

work page 2019