pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.26011 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

Parameter-estimation bias induced by transient orbital resonances in extreme-mass-ratio inspirals

Edoardo Levati , Alejandro C\'ardenas-Avenda\~no
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 15:01 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HE
keywords extreme-mass-ratio inspiralsorbital resonancesparameter estimationFisher matrixgravitational wavestransient resonancesintegrals of motion
0
0 comments X

The pith

Neglecting transient orbital resonances in extreme-mass-ratio inspirals produces significant biases in recovered parameters and losses in signal-to-noise ratio.

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

The paper examines the impact of transient orbital resonances on extreme-mass-ratio inspirals by applying a Fisher-matrix analysis to waveforms that include or omit resonance crossings. It focuses on the dominant low-order resonances 3:2 and 2:1 together with the higher-order cases 3:1 and 4:3, demonstrating that omission of these crossings typically reduces the effective signal-to-noise ratio and shifts the best-fit values of the source parameters. The direction and magnitude of the jumps in the integrals of motion at resonance are shown to control the size of the resulting bias. Accurate inclusion of these effects is therefore required if the signals are to be used for precise measurements.

Core claim

Using a Fisher-matrix approach, the analysis shows that for most of the orbits considered, neglecting the effect of a resonance crossing leads to significant losses in signal-to-noise ratio and induces bias in parameter recovery. Both the sign and the amplitude of the resonance-induced modifications to the integrals of motion play a crucial role and must be modeled accurately.

What carries the argument

Fisher-matrix formalism applied to extreme-mass-ratio inspiral waveforms that either include or exclude transient orbital resonances at specific frequency commensurabilities.

If this is right

  • Omitting resonance crossings reduces the effective signal-to-noise ratio available for detection.
  • Parameter biases appear in the recovered masses, spins, and orbital elements when resonances are ignored.
  • Both the sign and size of the jumps in the integrals of motion must be modeled to keep biases below acceptable thresholds.
  • The effect persists across both low-order and selected high-order resonances.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Waveform templates for space-based detectors will need to track resonance crossings explicitly if they are to support high-precision science.
  • Search algorithms that marginalize over resonance parameters or include them as additional search dimensions may become necessary.
  • The same resonance-induced dephasing could affect the ability to test general relativity with accumulated EMRI phase information.

Load-bearing premise

The Fisher-matrix approximation accurately captures the parameter bias induced by resonances without requiring full waveform injections or Bayesian sampling.

What would settle it

A direct comparison of the Fisher-matrix bias predictions against the posterior shifts recovered from full Bayesian sampling on the same resonance-crossing waveform injections would confirm or refute the reported bias magnitudes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.26011 by Alejandro C\'ardenas-Avenda\~no, Edoardo Levati.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The last portion of the waveforms for the EMRI view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Parameter bias induced by the view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Parameter bias for the EMRI view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Gaussian posterior approximation from the Fisher view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Given the multi-frequency nature of relativistic orbits, transient orbital resonances are expected to be ubiquitous during an extreme-mass-ratio inspiral (EMRI). At a resonance, the orbital dynamics is modified in a nontrivial way, imprinting an overall dephasing in the emitted gravitational waves and potentially impacting both the detection and parameter estimation of these sources. In this work, using a Fisher-matrix approach, we investigate the bias induced by transient orbital resonances in EMRI parameter estimation. We focus on the most dynamically significant low-order resonances, 3 : 2 and 2 : 1, as well as on the high-order, subdominant resonances 3 : 1 and 4 : 3. We find that, for most of the orbits considered, neglecting the effect of a resonance crossing leads to significant losses in signal-to-noise ratio and induces bias in parameter recovery. Furthermore, both the sign and the amplitude of the resonance-induced modifications to the integrals of motion play a crucial role and must be modeled accurately. Our results provide further evidence that failing to model transient orbital resonances accurately can hinder EMRI detection and parameter estimation, thereby limiting their scientific potential.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses a Fisher-matrix analysis to quantify the parameter-estimation bias and SNR loss that arise when transient orbital resonances (primarily 3:2 and 2:1, with secondary attention to 3:1 and 4:3) are omitted from EMRI waveform models. It concludes that resonance crossings generically produce significant biases whose magnitude and sign depend on the resonance-induced shifts in the integrals of motion, and that these effects must be modeled for reliable detection and parameter recovery.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold, the work supplies concrete evidence that resonance modeling is a necessary ingredient for EMRI science with LISA-class detectors. The emphasis on both the sign and amplitude of the resonance-induced changes to the integrals of motion is a useful diagnostic that could guide waveform development. The Fisher-matrix approach offers an efficient first-order estimate of bias, provided its domain of validity is established.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results / Fisher-matrix implementation] The central claim rests on Fisher-matrix bias forecasts, yet the manuscript does not appear to report waveform mismatches or dephasing accumulated across the resonance crossings. When dephasing reaches tens to hundreds of radians, the mismatch can exceed the ~0.1–0.2 regime in which the quadratic Fisher approximation remains accurate; this directly affects the reliability of the reported bias values for the 3:2 and 2:1 cases.
  2. [Abstract and §3 (or equivalent)] The abstract and summary statements assert “significant” SNR loss and bias “for most of the orbits considered,” but no explicit numerical values, orbit parameters (e.g., eccentricity, inclination, resonance crossing times), or Fisher-matrix expressions are supplied in the provided abstract. The manuscript must tabulate these quantities (including the bias vectors and the condition number of the Fisher matrix) so that the magnitude of the effect can be assessed.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction / Methods] Notation for the resonance-induced modifications to the integrals of motion should be defined once and used consistently; the distinction between “sign” and “amplitude” effects is important but currently introduced only qualitatively.
  2. [Introduction] The choice of the four resonances (3:2, 2:1, 3:1, 4:3) is motivated as “most dynamically significant,” but a brief justification or reference to prior work on resonance strength would help readers understand why higher-order resonances are treated as subdominant.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below. Where the comments identify areas for improvement, we have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results / Fisher-matrix implementation] The central claim rests on Fisher-matrix bias forecasts, yet the manuscript does not appear to report waveform mismatches or dephasing accumulated across the resonance crossings. When dephasing reaches tens to hundreds of radians, the mismatch can exceed the ~0.1–0.2 regime in which the quadratic Fisher approximation remains accurate; this directly affects the reliability of the reported bias values for the 3:2 and 2:1 cases.

    Authors: We agree that explicit reporting of dephasing and mismatches is necessary to establish the domain of validity of the Fisher-matrix approximation. We have added these calculations to the revised manuscript, including a dedicated discussion in the results section that quantifies the accumulated dephasing across each resonance crossing and the associated waveform mismatches. For the specific orbits and resonances analyzed, these values remain within the regime where the quadratic approximation is reliable, thereby supporting the reported bias forecasts. We also include a brief justification of the approximation's applicability based on these metrics. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract and §3 (or equivalent)] The abstract and summary statements assert “significant” SNR loss and bias “for most of the orbits considered,” but no explicit numerical values, orbit parameters (e.g., eccentricity, inclination, resonance crossing times), or Fisher-matrix expressions are supplied in the provided abstract. The manuscript must tabulate these quantities (including the bias vectors and the condition number of the Fisher matrix) so that the magnitude of the effect can be assessed.

    Authors: We accept that greater quantitative transparency is required. In the revised manuscript we have added a new table in Section 3 that tabulates the relevant orbit parameters (eccentricity, inclination, resonance crossing times), SNR losses, bias vectors, and Fisher-matrix condition numbers for all cases considered. We have also updated the abstract to include representative numerical values illustrating the magnitude of the SNR loss and parameter bias for the dominant resonances, while keeping the abstract concise. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper applies the standard Fisher-matrix formalism to compute parameter biases from the mismatch between resonance-inclusive and resonance-free EMRI waveform models. This is a direct statistical calculation on externally modeled waveforms; no step reduces a claimed prediction or first-principles result to a fitted quantity or self-citation by construction. The resonance modifications to the integrals of motion are taken from prior dynamical modeling, and the bias estimates follow from the usual quadratic likelihood approximation without self-referential redefinition. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, the central claim rests on the standard Fisher-matrix formalism and the assumption that the chosen resonances dominate the effect. No new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced or quantified in the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5510 in / 1235 out tokens · 83329 ms · 2026-05-07T15:01:56.491859+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

55 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    LISA Definition Study Report

    M. Colpiet al.(LISA), LISA Definition Study Report, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2402.07571 (2024), arXiv:2402.07571 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    P. A. Seoaneet al.(LISA), Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, Living Rev. Rel.26, 2 (2023), arXiv:2203.06016 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    S. A. Hughes, N. Warburton, G. Khanna, A. J. K. Chua, and M. L. Katz, Adiabatic waveforms for extreme mass- ratio inspirals via multivoice decomposition in time and frequency, Phys. Rev. D103, 104014 (2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    Amaro-Seoane, J

    P. Amaro-Seoane, J. R. Gair, M. Freitag, M. Cole- man Miller, I. Mandel, C. J. Cutler, and S. Babak, Astrophysics, detection and science applications of intermediate- and extreme mass-ratio inspirals, Class. Quant. Grav.24, R113 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0703495

    work page arXiv 2007

  5. [5]

    Barack and C

    L. Barack and C. Cutler, LISA capture sources: Approx- imate waveforms, signal-to-noise ratios, and parameter estimation accuracy, Phys. Rev. D69, 082005 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0310125

    work page arXiv 2004

  6. [6]

    Babak, H

    S. Babak, H. Fang, J. Gair, K. Glampedakis, and S. Hughes, "kludge" gravitational waveforms for a test- body orbiting a kerr black hole, Physical Review D75 (2006)

    2006

  7. [7]

    Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. V: Extreme mass-ratio inspirals

    S. Babak, J. Gair, A. Sesana, E. Barausse, C. F. Sop- uerta, C. P. L. Berry, E. Berti, P. Amaro-Seoane, A. Pe- titeau, and A. Klein, Science with the space-based inter- ferometer LISA. V: Extreme mass-ratio inspirals, Phys. Rev. D95, 103012 (2017), arXiv:1703.09722 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    F. D. Ryan, Gravitational waves from the inspiral of a compact object into a massive, axisymmetric body with arbitrary multipole moments, Phys. Rev. D52, 5707 (1995)

    1995

  9. [9]

    Speri, F

    L. Speri, F. Duque, S. Barsanti, A. Santini, S. Kejriwal, O. Burke, and C. E. A. Chapman-Bird, Quantifying the scientific potential of intermediate and extreme mass ra- tio inspirals with the laser interferometer space antenna (2026), arXiv:2603.17072 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2026

  10. [10]

    F. D. Ryan, Accuracy of estimating the multipole mo- ments of a massive body from the gravitational waves of a binary inspiral, Phys. Rev. D56, 1845 (1997)

    1997

  11. [11]

    Testing Gravity with Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals,

    A. Cárdenas-Avendaño and C. F. Sopuerta, Testing grav- ity with Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2401.08085 (2024), arXiv:2401.08085 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Speri, S

    L. Speri, S. Barsanti, A. Maselli, T. P. Sotiriou, N. War- burton, M. van de Meent, A. J. K. Chua, O. Burke, and J. Gair, Probing fundamental physics with extreme mass ratio inspirals: Full Bayesian inference for scalar charge, Phys. Rev. D113, 023036 (2026), arXiv:2406.07607 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    C. L. MacLeod and C. J. Hogan, Precision of Hubble constant derived using black hole binary absolute dis- tances and statistical redshift information, Phys. Rev. D 77, 043512 (2008), arXiv:0712.0618 [astro-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

  14. [14]

    Babak, J

    S. Babak, J. R. Gair, A. Petiteau, and A. Sesana, Funda- mental physics and cosmology with LISA, Class. Quant. Grav.28, 114001 (2011), arXiv:1011.2062 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  15. [15]

    Laghi, N

    D. Laghi, N. Tamanini, A. Sesana, J. Gair, E. Barausse, C. Caprini, W. D. Pozzo, A. Mangiagli, and S. Marsat, Reducing cosmological degeneracies by combining mul- tiple classes of lisa gravitational-wave standard sirens (2026), arXiv:2603.23612 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  16. [16]

    J. R. Gair, L. Barack, T. Creighton, C. Cutler, S. L. Larson, E. S. Phinney, and M. Vallisneri, Event rate estimates for LISA extreme mass ratio capture sources, Class. Quant. Grav.21, S1595 (2004), arXiv:gr- qc/0405137

    work page arXiv 2004

  17. [17]

    Qunbar and N

    I. Qunbar and N. C. Stone, Enhanced extreme mass ratio inspiral rates and intermediate mass black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 141401 (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    Speri, R

    L. Speri, R. Tenorio, C. Chapman-Bird, and D. Gerosa, Single-harmonic search for extreme mass-ratio inspirals, Phys. Rev. D113, 024061 (2026), arXiv:2510.20891 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    P. S. Cole, J. Alvey, L. Speri, C. Weniger, U. Bhard- waj, D. Gerosa, and G. Bertone, Sequential simulation- based inference for extreme mass ratio inspirals (2025), arXiv:2505.16795 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    M.VallisneriandN.Yunes,StealthBiasinGravitational- Wave Parameter Estimation, Phys. Rev. D87, 102002 (2013), arXiv:1301.2627 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2013

  21. [21]

    J. R. Gair, I. Mandel, and L. Wen, Improved time- frequency analysis of extreme-mass-ratio inspiral signals in mock LISA data, Class. Quant. Grav.25, 184031 (2008), arXiv:0804.1084 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2008

  22. [22]

    A. J. K. Chua, M. L. Katz, N. Warburton, and S. A. Hughes, Rapid generation of fully relativis- tic extreme-mass-ratio-inspiral waveform templates for LISA data analysis, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 051102 (2021), arXiv:2008.06071 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  23. [23]

    M. L. Katz, A. J. K. Chua, L. Speri, N. Warbur- ton, and S. A. Hughes, Fast extreme-mass-ratio-inspiral waveforms: New tools for millihertz gravitational- wave data analysis, Phys. Rev. D104, 064047 (2021), arXiv:2104.04582 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

    N. Afshordiet al.(LISA Consortium Waveform Work- ing Group), Waveform modelling for the Laser Interfer- ometer Space Antenna, Living Rev. Rel.28, 9 (2025), arXiv:2311.01300 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    G. A. Piovano, R. Brito, A. Maselli, and P. Pani, As- sessing the detectability of the secondary spin in ex- treme mass-ratio inspirals with fully relativistic numeri- cal waveforms, Phys. Rev. D104, 124019 (2021)

    2021

  26. [26]

    First-time assessment of glitch-induced bias and uncertainty in inference of extreme mass ratio inspirals

    A. Boumerdassi, M. C. Edwards, A. Vajpeyi, and O. Burke, First-time assessment of glitch-induced bias and uncertainty in inference of extreme mass ratio inspi- rals (2026), arXiv:2512.16322 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Bonga, H

    B. Bonga, H. Yang, and S. A. Hughes, Tidal resonance in extreme mass-ratio inspirals, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 101103 (2019)

    2019

  28. [28]

    Maselli, N

    A. Maselli, N. Franchini, L. Gualtieri, T. P. Sotiriou, S. Barsanti, and P. Pani, Detecting fundamental fields with lisa observations of gravitational waves from ex- treme mass-ratio inspirals, Nature Astronomy6, 464–470 (2022)

    2022

  29. [29]

    E. E. Flanagan and T. Hinderer, Transient resonances in the inspirals of point particles into black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 071102 (2012)

    2012

  30. [30]

    Ruangsri and S

    U. Ruangsri and S. A. Hughes, Census of transient orbital resonances encountered during binary inspiral, Phys. Rev. D89, 084036 (2014), arXiv:1307.6483 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    van de Meent, Conditions for Sustained Orbital Res- onances in Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals, Phys

    M. van de Meent, Conditions for Sustained Orbital Res- onances in Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals, Phys. Rev. D 10 89, 084033 (2014), arXiv:1311.4457 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  32. [32]

    C. P. L. Berry, R. H. Cole, P. Cañizares, and J. R. Gair, Importance of transient resonances in extreme- mass-ratio inspirals, Phys. Rev. D94, 124042 (2016), arXiv:1608.08951 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  33. [33]

    E. E. Flanagan, S. A. Hughes, and U. Ruangsri, Resonantly enhanced and diminished strong-field gravitational-wave fluxes, Phys. Rev. D89, 084028 (2014)

    2014

  34. [34]

    Lynch, V

    P. Lynch, V. Witzany, M. van de Meent, and N. War- burton, Fast inspirals and the treatment of orbital resonances, Class. Quant. Grav.41, 225002 (2024), arXiv:2405.21072 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    Speri and J

    L. Speri and J. R. Gair, Assessing the impact of transient orbital resonances, Phys. Rev. D103, 124032 (2021)

    2021

  36. [36]

    Levati, A

    E. Levati, A. Cárdenas-Avendaño, K. Destounis, and P. Pani, Cumulative effect of orbital resonances in extreme-mass-ratio inspirals, Phys. Rev. D111, 104006 (2025), arXiv:2502.20457 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Hinderer and E

    T. Hinderer and E. E. Flanagan, Two-timescale analysis of extreme mass ratio inspirals in kerr spacetime: Orbital motion, Phys. Rev. D78, 064028 (2008)

    2008

  38. [38]

    W.Schmidt,Celestialmechanicsinkerrspacetime,Class. Quant. Grav.19, 2743 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0202090 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2002

  39. [39]

    Fujita and W

    R. Fujita and W. Hikida, Analytical solutions of bound timelike geodesic orbits in kerr spacetime, Class. Quant. Grav.26, 135002 (2009), arXiv:0906.1420 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2009

  40. [40]

    Contopoulos,Order and chaos in dynamical astron- omy(2002)

    G. Contopoulos,Order and chaos in dynamical astron- omy(2002)

    2002

  41. [41]

    Gair and K

    J. Gair and K. Glampedakis, Improved approximate in- spirals of test-bodies into kerr black holes, Physical Re- view D73(2005)

    2005

  42. [42]

    M. L. Katz, J.-B. Bayle, A. J. K. Chua, and M. Vallisneri, Assessing the data-analysis impact of LISA orbit approx- imations using a GPU-accelerated response model, Phys. Rev. D106, 103001 (2022), arXiv:2204.06633 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  43. [43]

    M. Katz, C. Chapman-Bird, L. Speri, N. Karnesis, and A. Correia, mikekatz04/lisaanalysistools: v1.1.0 (2025)

    2025

  44. [44]

    T. A. Prince, M. Tinto, S. L. Larson, and J. W. Armstrong, LISA optimal sensitivity, Phys. Rev. D66, 122002 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0209039 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2002

  45. [45]

    A. J. K. Chua, C. J. Moore, and J. R. Gair, Augmented kludge waveforms for detecting extreme-mass-ratio inspi- rals, Phys. Rev. D96, 044005 (2017), arXiv:1705.04259 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  46. [46]

    Cutler and E

    C. Cutler and E. E. Flanagan, Gravitational waves from merging compact binaries: How accurately can one ex- tract the binary’s parameters from the inspiral wave- form?, Phys. Rev. D49, 2658 (1994)

    1994

  47. [47]

    Burke, G

    O. Burke, G. A. Piovano, N. Warburton, P. Lynch, L. Speri, C. Kavanagh, B. Wardell, A. Pound, L. Durkan, and J. Miller, Assessing the importance of first postadi- abatic terms for small-mass-ratio binaries, Phys. Rev. D 109, 124048 (2024), arXiv:2310.08927 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    B. J. Owen, Search templates for gravitational waves from inspiraling binaries: Choice of template spacing, Phys. Rev. D53, 6749 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9511032 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 1996

  49. [49]

    C. J. Moore, R. H. Cole, and C. P. L. Berry, Gravitational-wave sensitivity curves, Class. Quant. Grav.32, 015014 (2015), arXiv:1408.0740 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  50. [50]

    Vallisneri,Useandabuseof thefisherinformationma- trix in the assessment of gravitational-wave parameter- estimation prospects, Phys

    M. Vallisneri,Useandabuseof thefisherinformationma- trix in the assessment of gravitational-wave parameter- estimation prospects, Phys. Rev. D77, 042001 (2008)

    2008

  51. [51]

    J. R. Gair, M. Vallisneri, S. L. Larson, and J. G. Baker, Testing general relativity with low-frequency, space- based gravitational-wave detectors, Living Reviews in Relativity16, 10.12942/lrr-2013-7 (2013)

    work page doi:10.12942/lrr-2013-7 2013

  52. [52]

    Local quantum overlapping tomography,

    O. Burke, J. R. Gair, J. Simón, and M. C. Edwards, Constraining the spin parameter of near-extremal black holes using lisa, Physical Review D102, 10.1103/phys- revd.102.124054 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2020

  53. [53]

    Cutler and M

    C. Cutler and M. Vallisneri, Lisa detections of massive black hole inspirals: Parameter extraction errors due to inaccurate template waveforms, Physical Review D76, 10.1103/physrevd.76.104018 (2007)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.76.104018 2007

  54. [54]

    Chapman-Bird, A

    C. Chapman-Bird, A. J. K. Chua, S. Hughes, M. Katz, Z. Nasipak, M. Pigou, L. Speri, and N. Warburton, Fastemriwaveforms (2025)

    2025

  55. [55]

    Information Systems and Wake Forest University, WFU High Performance Computing Facility (2021)

    2021