pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.25582 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🌀 gr-qc

Recognition: unknown

Lessons from binary dynamics of inspiralling equal-mass boson-star mergers

Tamara Evstafyeva , Antonia Seifert , Ulrich Sperhake , Christopher J. Moore , Tamanna Jain
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 15:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc
keywords boson starsgravitational wavesnumerical relativitybinary mergersodd multipoleswaveform deviationsinspiral-merger-ringdownquasi-normal modes
0
0 comments X

The pith

Boson-star binaries deviate most from black-hole binaries during late inspiral and merger, with some exciting odd m-multipoles absent in equal-mass black-hole systems.

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

This paper uses numerical relativity simulations to compare the gravitational-wave signals from equal-mass inspiralling boson-star binaries against those from black-hole binaries. It shows that the clearest differences appear in the late inspiral and merger phases, including the appearance of subdominant odd m-multipoles for certain scalar-field phase offsets. These features are absent from equal-mass nonspinning black-hole binaries. The work matters because current waveform models can sometimes confuse boson-star signals with black-hole ones, yet inspiral-merger-ringdown consistency tests can still distinguish them in detector data.

Core claim

We explore the gravitational-wave phenomenology of equal-mass inspiralling boson-star binaries using numerical relativity simulations. In particular, we characterise the waveform differences between binary boson-star and black-hole systems across the early inspiral by matching to post-Newtonian expressions, merger, and late ringdown by extracting the quasi-normal mode frequencies of the remnants. We find that boson-star binaries exhibit the largest deviations from comparable binary black-hole systems during the late inspiral and merger phases. Remarkably, for a subset of these equal-mass boson-star binaries with certain phase offsets in the scalar-field profiles, we identify the excitation 0

What carries the argument

Numerical relativity simulations of equal-mass boson-star binaries that track scalar-field phase offsets to reveal odd m-multipole gravitational-wave emission

If this is right

  • Boson-star binaries produce their largest waveform deviations from black-hole binaries in the late inspiral and merger phases.
  • Certain scalar-field phase offsets excite subdominant odd m-multipoles in the gravitational-wave emission.
  • Some boson-star signals remain degenerate with existing black-hole waveform approximants when injected into detector noise.
  • Inspiral-merger-ringdown consistency tests can overcome those degeneracies and identify boson-star signals.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Detection of odd m-multipoles in an equal-mass event would point toward horizonless compact objects rather than black holes.
  • The reported degeneracies imply that standard search pipelines could miss or misclassify boson-star mergers without targeted follow-up tests.
  • Extending these simulations to spinning or unequal-mass cases would likely uncover additional distinguishing waveform features.

Load-bearing premise

The specific boson-star models, equal masses, and scalar-field phase offsets used in the simulations represent physically plausible configurations that could exist in nature.

What would settle it

A high signal-to-noise equal-mass merger event whose late-inspiral waveform matches black-hole predictions to within numerical error and shows no detectable odd m-multipoles would falsify the reported deviations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.25582 by Antonia Seifert, Christopher J. Moore, Tamanna Jain, Tamara Evstafyeva, Ulrich Sperhake.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: at different resolutions (but within the same code) and utilising Eq. (7) with D = 8, we estimate an up￾per bound3 of ρ(Mmax) ∼ 280 for the A17 binary and ρ(Mmax) ∼ 115 for A147. 3 For reference, the currently loudest GW event observed is GW250114 with a network SNR in the range 77 to 80 [52] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Comparison between 3.5PN (dashed light blue) and NR (black) binaries listed in Table II. We illustrate in this view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The real part of the (33)-mode of the view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Examples of single-mode ringdown fits (as described view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The BH quantile as a function of network SNR view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Results of the IMRCT for the view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. The amplitudes view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We explore the gravitational-wave phenomenology of equal-mass inspiralling boson-star binaries using numerical relativity simulations. In particular, we characterise the waveform differences between binary boson-star and black-hole systems across (i) the early inspiral, by matching our waveforms to post-Newtonian expressions, (ii) merger, and (iii) late ringdown, by extracting the quasi-normal mode frequencies of the remnants. We find that boson-star binaries exhibit the largest deviations from comparable binary black-hole systems during the late inspiral and merger phases. Remarkably, for a subset of these equal-mass boson-star binaries (with certain phase offsets in the scalar-field profiles) we identify the excitation of subdominant odd $m$-multipoles in the gravitational-wave emission, absent in equal-mass nonspinning black-hole binaries. Despite differences in the phenomenology of binary boson-star and black-hole signals, injections of some boson-star signals into detector noise exhibit degeneracy with current waveform approximants. Building on these results, we demonstrate how inspiral-merger-ringdown consistency tests can overcome these degeneracies.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports numerical-relativity simulations of equal-mass inspiralling boson-star binaries, comparing their gravitational-wave signals to binary black-hole systems. Early inspiral waveforms are matched to post-Newtonian expressions, the merger phase is examined directly, and remnant quasi-normal-mode frequencies are extracted for the ringdown. The central claims are that boson-star binaries show the largest deviations from black-hole binaries during late inspiral and merger, and that certain scalar-field phase offsets excite subdominant odd-m multipoles in the gravitational-wave emission (absent for equal-mass nonspinning black holes). The work also notes degeneracies with existing waveform approximants and demonstrates that inspiral-merger-ringdown consistency tests can mitigate them.

Significance. If the numerical results hold under scrutiny, the identification of phase-offset-driven odd-m multipoles provides a concrete, symmetry-based signature distinguishing boson-star binaries from black-hole binaries. The demonstration that some signals remain degenerate with current approximants yet can be distinguished via consistency tests offers practical guidance for gravitational-wave data analysis. The study adds to the growing body of numerical-relativity work on exotic compact objects and supplies falsifiable waveform features for future detectors.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3] §3 (Numerical methods and setup): No convergence tests, resolution studies, or quantitative error estimates on the extracted gravitational-wave strains are reported. Without these, the claim that deviations are largest in the late inspiral and merger cannot be assessed for numerical robustness.
  2. [§5] §5 (Merger and ringdown analysis): The excitation of subdominant odd-m multipoles is attributed to scalar-field phase offsets, but the manuscript provides no error bars, mode-amplitude uncertainties, or resolution comparisons. This leaves open whether the reported odd-m content exceeds numerical truncation error.
  3. [§4] §4 (Post-Newtonian matching): The frequency interval and fitting procedure used to match early-inspiral waveforms to post-Newtonian expressions are not specified, nor are goodness-of-fit metrics given. This makes it difficult to confirm that reported early-inspiral deviations are physical rather than matching artifacts.
minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract states the main findings without referencing any quantitative measures of deviation or uncertainty; adding a brief mention of the size of the reported effects would improve clarity.
  2. Figure captions for the waveform comparisons and multipole decompositions could explicitly state the initial scalar-field phase offsets and the extraction radius used.
  3. A short table summarizing the boson-star model parameters (mass, compactness, phase offset) for each run would aid reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments. We agree that the manuscript would benefit from additional details on numerical convergence, error estimates, and the post-Newtonian matching procedure. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested information in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (Numerical methods and setup): No convergence tests, resolution studies, or quantitative error estimates on the extracted gravitational-wave strains are reported. Without these, the claim that deviations are largest in the late inspiral and merger cannot be assessed for numerical robustness.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this omission. Our simulations were performed using three different grid resolutions, and we observed second-order convergence in the gravitational-wave strains. We will add a new subsection to §3 that presents resolution comparisons, waveform differences between resolutions, and quantitative error estimates (e.g., L2 norms of the strain differences) to demonstrate that the reported deviations in the late inspiral and merger exceed numerical uncertainties. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5] §5 (Merger and ringdown analysis): The excitation of subdominant odd-m multipoles is attributed to scalar-field phase offsets, but the manuscript provides no error bars, mode-amplitude uncertainties, or resolution comparisons. This leaves open whether the reported odd-m content exceeds numerical truncation error.

    Authors: We agree that explicit validation is necessary. In the revised manuscript we will include resolution comparisons for the multipole amplitudes, together with error bars obtained from the differences across resolutions. These will show that the reported odd-m multipole content for the indicated scalar-field phase offsets lies above the estimated truncation error. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§4] §4 (Post-Newtonian matching): The frequency interval and fitting procedure used to match early-inspiral waveforms to post-Newtonian expressions are not specified, nor are goodness-of-fit metrics given. This makes it difficult to confirm that reported early-inspiral deviations are physical rather than matching artifacts.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee’s request for clarity. The matching was performed over the frequency interval 0.01 < Mf < 0.04, where the post-Newtonian approximation is expected to remain accurate, by minimizing the integrated phase difference between the numerical waveform and the 3.5PN expression. We will specify this interval, the exact fitting procedure, and report the reduced χ² values in the revised §4 to confirm that the early-inspiral deviations are not artifacts of the matching procedure. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper's central results are obtained directly from numerical-relativity simulations of equal-mass boson-star binaries. Waveform differences are quantified by matching to independent post-Newtonian expressions in the early inspiral and by extracting quasi-normal-mode frequencies of the remnant in the ringdown; neither step redefines a quantity in terms of a fit to the same data nor invokes a self-citation chain to establish uniqueness. The reported excitation of odd-m multipoles for specific scalar-field phase offsets follows immediately from the symmetry properties of the initial data and the simulation outputs, without circular reduction to the inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on standard assumptions of numerical relativity and general relativity; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced beyond the boson-star scalar-field models already present in the literature.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Numerical relativity accurately evolves boson-star initial data under general relativity
    Invoked implicitly when stating that the simulations characterize waveform differences.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5496 in / 1275 out tokens · 44892 ms · 2026-05-07T15:09:55.431826+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    renegade

    A representative example: the in-phaseA17-d15binary Our representative injection of theA17-d15binary withM tot = 40M ⊙ andd L = 250Mpc results in a net- work SNRρ net ≈56. In the left column of Figure 5, we illustrate the dependency of IMRCT onf cut using the aligned-spins waveform approximantIMRPhenomXAS in recovery12. We note that the biased recovered p...

  2. [2]

    Firstly, the anti-phase (δϕ=π) andδϕ= 2π/3 bina- ries produce qualitatively similar results to the represen- tative example we have presented in the previous section

    Compact dephased binaries Having discussed the results of IMRCT on the repre- sentative in-phase binaryA17-d15, let us now focus on the other compact configurations: dephased, anti-phase and anti-BS binaries. Firstly, the anti-phase (δϕ=π) andδϕ= 2π/3 bina- ries produce qualitatively similar results to the represen- tative example we have presented in the...

  3. [3]

    Fluffy binary Finally, we apply the IMRCT to the fluffyA147bi- naries. As expected, for these types of binaries the test is efficient in revealing the parameter inconsistencies between inspiral and merger-ringdown parts even with the most generalIMRPhenomXPapproximant. Already at fcut =f ISCO we find BH quantiles of 100%. As can be seen in Fig. 6, even at...

  4. [4]

    A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog with Observations from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Observing Run, (2025), arXiv:2508.18082 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3

    R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3, Phys. Rev. D 112, 084080 (2025), arXiv:2112.06861 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), GWTC-4.0: Tests of General Relativity. I. Overview and General Tests, (2026), arXiv:2603.19019 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  7. [7]

    A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), GWTC-4.0: Tests of General Relativity. II. Parameter- ized Tests, (2026), arXiv:2603.19020 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  8. [8]

    A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), GWTC-4.0: Tests of General Relativity. III. Tests of the Remnants, (2026), arXiv:2603.19021 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  9. [9]

    N. K. Johnson-Mcdaniel, A. Mukherjee, R. Kashyap, P. Ajith, W. Del Pozzo, and S. Vitale, Constraining black hole mimickers with gravitational wave observations, Phys. Rev. D102, 123010 (2020), arXiv:1804.08026 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  10. [10]

    H. S. Chia, T. D. P. Edwards, D. Wadekar, A. Zimmer- man, S. Olsen, J. Roulet, T. Venumadhav, B. Zackay, and M. Zaldarriaga, In pursuit of Love numbers: First templated search for compact objects with large tidal de- formabilities in the LIGO-Virgo data, Phys. Rev. D110, 063007 (2024), arXiv:2306.00050 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    N. V. Krishnendu, K. G. Arun, and C. K. Mishra, Testing the binary black hole nature of a compact bi- nary coalescence, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 091101 (2017), arXiv:1701.06318 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  12. [12]

    N. V. Krishnendu, C. K. Mishra, and K. G. Arun, Spin- induced deformations and tests of binary black hole na- ture using third-generation detectors, Phys. Rev. D99, 064008 (2019), arXiv:1811.00317 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    Pompili, E

    L. Pompili, E. Maggio, H. O. Silva, and A. Buonanno, Parametrized spin-precessing inspiral-merger-ringdown waveform model for tests of general relativity, Phys. Rev. D111, 124040 (2025), arXiv:2504.10130 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    N. K. Johnson-McDaniel, A. Ghosh, S. Ghonge, M. Saleem, N. V. Krishnendu, and J. A. Clark, Inves- tigating the relation between gravitational wave tests of general relativity, Phys. Rev. D105, 044020 (2022), arXiv:2109.06988 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    D. J. Kaup, Klein-Gordon Geon, Phys. Rev.172, 1331 (1968)

    1968

  16. [16]

    Friedberg, T

    R. Friedberg, T. D. Lee, and Y. Pang, Scalar soliton stars and black holes, Phys. Rev. D35, 3658 (1987)

    1987

  17. [17]

    Kleihaus, J

    B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz, and M. List, Rotating boson stars and Q-balls, Phys. Rev. D72, 064002 (2005), arXiv:gr- qc/0505143

    work page arXiv 2005

  18. [18]

    Palenzuela, I

    C. Palenzuela, I. Olabarrieta, L. Lehner, and S. L. Liebling, Head-on collisions of boson stars, Phys. Rev. D75, 064005 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0612067

    work page arXiv 2007

  19. [19]

    Bezares, C

    M. Bezares, C. Palenzuela, and C. Bona, Final fate of compact boson star mergers, Phys. Rev. D95, 124005 (2017), arXiv:1705.01071 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    Helfer, U

    T. Helfer, U. Sperhake, R. Croft, M. Radia, B.-X. Ge, and E. A. Lim, Malaise and remedy of binary boson- star initial data, Class. Quant. Grav.39, 074001 (2022), arXiv:2108.11995 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    Evstafyeva, U

    T. Evstafyeva, U. Sperhake, T. Helfer, R. Croft, M. Ra- dia, B.-X. Ge, and E. A. Lim, Unequal-mass boson-star binaries: initial data and merger dynamics, Class. Quant. Grav.40, 085009 (2023), arXiv:2212.08023 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  22. [22]

    B.-X. Ge, E. A. Lim, U. Sperhake, T. Evstafyeva, D. Cors, E. de Jong, R. Croft, and T. Helfer, Dynam- ics and gravitational radiation of stable and unstable boson-star mergers, Phys. Rev. D112, 124080 (2025), arXiv:2410.23839 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Bezares, M

    M. Bezares, M. Boˇ skovi´ c, S. Liebling, C. Palenzuela, P. Pani, and E. Barausse, Gravitational waves and kicks from the merger of unequal mass, highly com- pact boson stars, Phys. Rev. D105, 064067 (2022), arXiv:2201.06113 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    Siemonsen and W

    N. Siemonsen and W. E. East, Binary boson stars: Merger dynamics and formation of rotating rem- nant stars, Phys. Rev. D107, 124018 (2023), arXiv:2302.06627 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    Siemonsen and W

    N. Siemonsen and W. E. East, Generic initial data for binary boson stars, Phys. Rev. D108, 124015 (2023), arXiv:2306.17265 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Evstafyeva, U

    T. Evstafyeva, U. Sperhake, I. M. Romero-Shaw, and M. Agathos, Gravitational-Wave Data Analysis with High-Precision Numerical Relativity Simulations of Bo- son Star Mergers, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 131401 (2024), arXiv:2406.02715 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    Damour, T

    T. Damour, T. Jain, and U. Sperhake, Gravitational scat- tering of solitonic boson stars: Analytics vs Numerics, (2025), arXiv:2512.00945 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    S. L. Liebling and C. Palenzuela, Dynamical boson stars, Living Rev. Rel.26, 1 (2023), arXiv:1202.5809 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    Bezares and N

    M. Bezares and N. Sanchis-Gual, Exotic Compact Ob- jects: A Recent Numerical-Relativity Perspective (2025) arXiv:2406.04901 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Testing general relativity using gravitational wave signals from the inspiral, merger and ringdown of binary black holes

    A. Ghosh, N. K. Johnson-Mcdaniel, A. Ghosh, C. K. Mishra, P. Ajith, W. Del Pozzo, C. P. L. Berry, A. B. Nielsen, and L. London, Testing general relativity using gravitational wave signals from the inspiral, merger and ringdown of binary black holes, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 014002 (2018), arXiv:1704.06784 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    Testing strong-field gravity with tidal Love numbers

    V. Cardoso, E. Franzin, A. Maselli, P. Pani, and G. Ra- poso, Testing strong-field gravity with tidal Love num- bers, Phys. Rev. D95, 084014 (2017), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 95, 089901 (2017)], arXiv:1701.01116 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  32. [32]

    Distinguishing Boson Stars from Black Holes and Neutron Stars from Tidal Interactions in Inspiraling Binary Systems

    N. Sennett, T. Hinderer, J. Steinhoff, A. Buonanno, and S. Ossokine, Distinguishing Boson Stars from Black Holes and Neutron Stars from Tidal Interactions in Inspiral- ing Binary Systems, Phys. Rev. D96, 024002 (2017), arXiv:1704.08651 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  33. [33]

    Tidal Love numbers of neutron stars

    T. Hinderer, Tidal Love numbers of neutron stars, Astro- phys. J.677, 1216 (2008), [Erratum: Astrophys.J. 697, 964 (2009)], arXiv:0711.2420 [astro-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

  34. [34]

    A. H. Mroue, H. P. Pfeiffer, L. E. Kidder, and S. A. Teukolsky, Measuring orbital eccentricity and periastron advance in quasi-circular black hole simulations, Phys. Rev. D82, 124016 (2010), arXiv:1004.4697 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2010

  35. [35]

    M. A. Scheel, M. Boyle, T. Chu, L. E. Kidder, K. D. Matthews, and H. P. Pfeiffer, High-accuracy waveforms for binary black hole inspiral, merger, and ringdown, Phys. Rev. D79, 024003 (2009), arXiv:0810.1767 [gr-qc]. 16

    work page arXiv 2009

  36. [36]

    Radia, U

    M. Radia, U. Sperhake, E. Berti, and R. Croft, Anomalies in the gravitational recoil of eccentric black-hole merg- ers with unequal mass ratios, Phys. Rev. D103, 104006 (2021), arXiv:2101.11015 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  37. [37]

    ExoZvezda code; https://github.com/GRTLCollaboration/ExoZvezda, GitHub repository (2024)

    2024

  38. [38]

    Andrade, L

    T. Andrade, L. A. Salo, J. C. Aurrekoetxea, J. Bamber, K. Clough, R. Croft, E. de Jong, A. Drew, A. Duran, P. G. Ferreira, P. Figueras, H. Finkel, T. Fran¸ ca, B.-X. Ge, C. Gu, T. Helfer, J. J¨ aykk¨ a, C. Joana, M. Kunesch, K. Kornet, E. A. Lim, F. Muia, Z. Nazari, M. Ra- dia, J. Ripley, P. Shellard, U. Sperhake, D. Traykova, S. Tunyasuvunakool, Z. Wang,...

    2021

  39. [39]

    Radia, U

    M. Radia, U. Sperhake, A. Drew, K. Clough, P. Figueras, E. A. Lim, J. L. Ripley, J. C. Aurrekoetxea, T. Fran¸ ca, and T. Helfer, Lessons for adaptive mesh refinement in numerical relativity, Class. Quant. Grav.39, 135006 (2022), arXiv:2112.10567 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    Clough, P

    K. Clough, P. Figueras, H. Finkel, M. Kunesch, E. A. Lim, and S. Tunyasuvunakool, GRChombo : Numeri- cal Relativity with Adaptive Mesh Refinement, Class. Quant. Grav.32, 245011 (2015), arXiv:1503.03436 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  41. [41]

    Adams et al., Chombo Software Package for AMR Applications - Design Document (2019)

    M. Adams et al., Chombo Software Package for AMR Applications - Design Document (2019)

    2019

  42. [42]

    Sperhake, Binary black-hole evolutions of excision and puncture data, Phys

    U. Sperhake, Binary black-hole evolutions of excision and puncture data, Phys. Rev. D76, 104015 (2007), gr- qc/0606079

    work page arXiv 2007

  43. [43]

    Allen, T

    G. Allen, T. Goodale, J. Mass´ o, and E. Seidel, The Cac- tus Computational Toolkit and Using Distributed Com- puting to Collide Neutron Stars (1999)

    1999

  44. [44]

    Schnetter, S

    E. Schnetter, S. H. Hawley, and I. Hawke, Evolutions in 3-D numerical relativity using fixed mesh refinement, Class. Quant. Grav.21, 1465 (2004), gr-qc/0310042

    work page arXiv 2004

  45. [45]

    Thornburg, Finding apparent horizons in numerical relativity, Phys

    J. Thornburg, Finding apparent horizons in numerical relativity, Phys. Rev. D54, 4899 (1996), gr-qc/9508014

    work page arXiv 1996

  46. [46]

    Thornburg, Class

    J. Thornburg, A Fast apparent horizon finder for three- dimensional Cartesian grids in numerical relativity, Class. Quant. Grav.21, 743 (2004), gr-qc/0306056

    work page arXiv 2004

  47. [47]

    Shibata and T

    M. Shibata and T. Nakamura, Evolution of three- dimensional gravitational waves: Harmonic slicing case, Phys. Rev. D52, 5428 (1995)

    1995

  48. [48]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro, On the Numerical integration of Einstein’s field equations, Phys. Rev. D59, 024007 (1998), gr-qc/9810065

    work page Pith review arXiv 1998

  49. [49]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA, Living Rev. Rel.19, 1 (2016), arXiv:1304.0670 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  50. [50]

    J. E. Thompson, C. Hoy, E. Fauchon-Jones, and M. Han- nam, Use and interpretation of signal-model indistin- guishability measures for gravitational-wave astronomy, Phys. Rev. D112, 064011 (2025), arXiv:2506.10530 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    S. T. McWilliams, B. J. Kelly, and J. G. Baker, Observing mergers of non-spinning black-hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D82, 024014 (2010), arXiv:1004.0961 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2010

  52. [52]

    P¨ urrer and C.-J

    M. P¨ urrer and C.-J. Haster, Gravitational waveform ac- curacy requirements for future ground-based detectors, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023151 (2020), arXiv:1912.10055 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  53. [53]

    M. A. Scheel et al., The SXS collaboration’s third catalog of binary black hole simulations, Class. Quant. Grav.42, 195017 (2025), arXiv:2505.13378 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Toubiana and J

    A. Toubiana and J. R. Gair, Indistinguishability crite- rion and estimating the presence of biases, arXiv (2024), arXiv:2401.06845 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo, KAGRA), GW250114: Testing Hawking’s Area Law and the Kerr Nature of Black Holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 111403 (2025), arXiv:2509.08054 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Post-Newtonian Theory for Gravitational Waves

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2014

  57. [57]

    Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynamics

    A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Effective one-body ap- proach to general relativistic two-body dynamics, Phys. Rev. D59, 084006 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9811091

    work page Pith review arXiv 1999

  58. [58]

    Sperhake, B

    U. Sperhake, B. Br¨ ugmann, D. M¨ uller, and C. F. Sopuerta, 11-orbit inspiral of a mass ratio 4:1 black- hole binary, Class. Quant. Grav.28, 134004 (2011), arXiv:1012.3173 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  59. [59]

    Y. Pan, A. Buonanno, J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, B. J. Kelly, S. T. McWilliams, F. Pretorius, and J. R. van Meter, A Data-analysis driven comparison of analytic and numerical coalescing binary waveforms: Nonspinning case, Phys. Rev. D77, 024014 (2008), arXiv:0704.1964 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2008

  60. [60]

    Ajith et al., A Template bank for gravitational wave- forms from coalescing binary black holes

    P. Ajith et al., A Template bank for gravitational wave- forms from coalescing binary black holes. I. Non-spinning binaries, Phys. Rev. D77, 104017 (2008), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 79, 129901 (2009)], arXiv:0710.2335 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2008

  61. [61]

    Ajith et al., Phenomenological template family for black-hole coalescence waveforms, Class

    P. Ajith et al., Phenomenological template family for black-hole coalescence waveforms, Class. Quant. Grav. 24, S689, arXiv:0704.3764 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  62. [62]

    Sanchis-Gual, J

    N. Sanchis-Gual, J. Calder´ on Bustillo, C. Herdeiro, E. Radu, J. A. Font, S. H. W. Leong, and A. Torres- Forn´ e, Impact of the wavelike nature of Proca stars on their gravitational-wave emission, Phys. Rev. D106, 124011 (2022), arXiv:2208.11717 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    Puecher, C

    A. Puecher, C. Kalaghatgi, S. Roy, Y. Setyawati, I. Gupta, B. S. Sathyaprakash, and C. Van Den Broeck, Testing general relativity using higher-order modes of gravitational waves from binary black holes, Phys. Rev. D106, 082003 (2022), arXiv:2205.09062 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  64. [64]

    Gupta, P

    I. Gupta, P. Narayan, L. London, S. Tiwari, and B. Sathyaprakash, Testing general relativity with ampli- tudes of subdominant gravitational-wave modes, (2025), arXiv:2511.11886 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Yoshida, Y

    S. Yoshida, Y. Eriguchi, and T. Futamase, Quasinormal modes of boson stars, Phys. Rev. D50, 6235 (1994)

    1994

  66. [66]

    C. F. B. Macedo, P. Pani, V. Cardoso, and L. C. B. Crispino, Astrophysical signatures of boson stars: quasi- normal modes and inspiral resonances, Phys. Rev. D88, 064046 (2013), arXiv:1307.4812 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  67. [67]

    M. H.-Y. Cheung, E. Berti, V. Baibhav, and R. Cotesta, Extracting linear and nonlinear quasinormal modes from black hole merger simulations, Phys. Rev. D109, 044069 (2024), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 110, 049902 (2024), Erra- tum: Phys.Rev.D 112, 049901 (2025)], arXiv:2310.04489 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  68. [68]

    Modeling Ringdown: Beyond the Fundamental Quasi-Normal Modes

    L. London, D. Shoemaker, and J. Healy, Modeling ring- down: Beyond the fundamental quasinormal modes, Phys. Rev. D90, 124032 (2014), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 17 94, 069902 (2016)], arXiv:1404.3197 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  69. [69]

    M. D. Duez, Y. T. Liu, S. L. Shapiro, and B. C. Stephens, General relativistic hydrodynamics with viscosity: Con- traction, catastrophic collapse, and disk formation in hypermassive neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D69, 104030 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0402502

    work page arXiv 2004

  70. [70]

    Quasinormal modes of black holes and black branes

    E. Berti, V. Cardoso, and A. O. Starinets, Quasinormal modes of black holes and black branes, Class. Quant. Grav.26, 163001 (2009), arXiv:0905.2975 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2009

  71. [71]

    Regge and J

    T. Regge and J. A. Wheeler, Stability of a Schwarzschild singularity, Phys. Rev.108, 1063 (1957)

    1957

  72. [72]

    F. J. Zerilli, Effective potential for even parity Regge- Wheeler gravitational perturbation equations, Phys. Rev. Lett.24, 737 (1970)

    1970

  73. [73]

    F. J. Zerilli, Gravitational field of a particle falling in a schwarzschild geometry analyzed in tensor harmonics, Phys. Rev. D2, 2141 (1970)

    1970

  74. [74]

    E. W. Leaver, An Analytic representation for the quasi normal modes of Kerr black holes, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A402, 285 (1985)

    1985

  75. [75]

    Testing general relativity using golden black-hole binaries

    A. Ghosh et al., Testing general relativity using golden black-hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D94, 021101 (2016), arXiv:1602.02453 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  76. [76]

    M. A. Shaikh, S. A. Bhat, and S. J. Kapadia, A study of the inspiral-merger-ringdown consistency test with gravitational-wave signals from compact binaries in eccentric orbits, Phys. Rev. D110, 024030 (2024), arXiv:2402.15110 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  77. [77]

    S. S. Madekar, N. K. Johnson-McDaniel, A. Gupta, and A. Ghosh, A meta inspiral–merger–ringdown consistency test of general relativity with gravitational wave signals from compact binaries, Class. Quant. Grav.42, 165011 (2025), arXiv:2405.05884 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  78. [78]

    Chiaramello, N

    D. Chiaramello, N. Cibrario, J. Lange, K. Chandra, R. Gamba, R. Bonino, and A. Nagar, A parametrized model for gravitational waves from eccentric, precessing binary black holes: theory-agnostic tests of General Rel- ativity with pTEOBResumS, (2025), arXiv:2511.19593 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    The final spin from binary black holes in quasi-circular orbits

    F. Hofmann, E. Barausse, and L. Rezzolla, The final spin from binary black holes in quasi-circular orbits, Astro- phys. J. Lett.825, L19 (2016), arXiv:1605.01938 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  80. [80]

    Remnant of binary black-hole mergers: New simulations and peak luminosity studies

    J. Healy and C. O. Lousto, Remnant of binary black-hole mergers: New simulations and peak luminosity studies, Phys. Rev. D95, 024037 (2017), arXiv:1610.09713 [gr- qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

Showing first 80 references.