pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.03776 · v1 · pith:N3OT7XTInew · submitted 2026-06-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · gr-qc

Targeting black holes from metal-poor progenitors with next-generation gravitational-wave detectors

Federico Leto di Priolo , Martyna Chru\'sli\'nska , Davide Gerosa This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 09:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE gr-qc
keywords binary black holesgravitational wavesmetallicitystar formation ratemerger rate densitynext-generation detectorscosmic evolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

Next-generation gravitational-wave detectors can isolate binary black-hole mergers from metal-poor progenitors by comparing rates at a target redshift to local rates.

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

The paper introduces a target redshift z_t defined as the epoch where more than 90 percent of stars form with metallicity below 0.1 solar. This definition isolates the subset of binary black-hole mergers that originate in metal-poor environments from the mixed population observed locally. A statistical framework then measures how the merger-rate density changes between z_t and the present day, mapping trends across parameter space. The same framework estimates how many detections are required to separate genuine astrophysical changes from statistical fluctuations. The value of z_t itself depends on the adopted reconstruction of star-formation rate versus iron abundance and can range from roughly 4 to beyond 10.

Core claim

By defining a target redshift z_t as the epoch at which more than 90 percent of stars form with Z less than 0.1 Z_sun, mergers from metal-poor progenitors can be isolated. The paper presents a statistical framework that compares the binary black-hole merger-rate density at this z_t to the local Universe, mapping evolutionary trends and determining the number of detections needed to distinguish astrophysical signals from statistical noise with next-generation detectors.

What carries the argument

The target redshift z_t, the cosmic epoch at which more than 90 percent of star formation occurs at metallicity Z less than 0.1 Z_sun, which isolates the contribution from metal-poor progenitors.

If this is right

  • Merger-rate density variations between z_t and the local universe directly trace evolutionary trends in black-hole formation across parameter space.
  • The framework calculates the detection statistics required to distinguish genuine astrophysical variations from statistical fluctuations.
  • Rapid tests of astrophysical predictions become possible against forecasted observations from detectors such as the Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer.
  • z_t ranges from approximately 4 to greater than 10 depending on the adopted model for star-formation rate density versus iron abundance.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If z_t turns out high, a large fraction of local mergers would originate from the early universe, complicating direct interpretation of current catalogs.
  • The isolation method could be generalized to other metallicity thresholds or combined with mass and spin distributions to refine progenitor tagging.
  • Observing strategies for next-generation detectors might need to prioritize high-redshift event collection to reach the required statistics in reasonable time.

Load-bearing premise

The cosmic star-formation rate density can be reconstructed as a function of iron abundance using empirical scaling relations in a manner that defines a meaningful target redshift separating metallicity regimes.

What would settle it

Future observations from Einstein Telescope or Cosmic Explorer showing merger-rate densities at the calculated z_t that remain statistically consistent with local rates after hundreds of events would indicate that z_t does not effectively isolate metal-poor progenitor populations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.03776 by Davide Gerosa, Federico Leto di Priolo, Martyna Chru\'sli\'nska.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Detection probability for the ET+CE network as a function of primary BH mass m1 and redshift z. The color map refers to equal-mass binaries (q = 1). Solid contours indicate pdet = 0.5 for different values of the mass ratio. 0 2 4 6 8 10 z 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 VT [Gpc 3yr] q = 1 m1 = 10 M m1 = 35 M Tobs 1 + z dVc dz [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Evolution of the differential spacetime-volume, VT, with redshift for different binary BH masses, assuming equal-mass sources (q = 1) and Tobs = 1 yr. The solid curve assumes pdet = 1 for all sources; the colored curves correspond to BH binaries with m1 = 10 M⊙ and 35 M⊙. “CE-40” in gwbench. We set ρthr = 8 √ 2 and use cosmological parameters from Aghanim et al. (2020). For a given (z, m1, m2) triplet, we … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Fraction of stellar mass formed with iron abundance below [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The top panels show the median of the inferred [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: We show 95% confidence regions for the merger rate density ratio for selected values of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Distributions of Rt/Rref inferred using Eq. (14) for the points marked in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Examples of BH merger rate densities computed convolv [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Next-generation gravitational-wave detectors such as the Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer will be able to detect binary black-hole mergers out to the cosmic dawn. Mergers observed in the local Universe represent a mixture of systems formed across the entire cosmic history, spanning a wide range of astrophysical environments. Iron-group elements govern metallicity effects on stellar evolution, making metallicity a key tracer that leaves a strong imprint on the black-hole population. We introduce the concept of a "target" redshift, $z_t$, defined as the epoch at which more than 90% of stars form with metallicity $Z < 0.1\,Z_\odot$. This provides a straightforward way to isolate mergers originating from metal-poor environments. The determination of $z_t$ relies on the reconstruction of the cosmic star-formation rate density as a function of iron abundance. This reconstruction is not unique, as it depends on the combination of different empirical scaling relations. Consequently, $z_t$ spans a broad range, from $z_t \sim 4$ to $z_t > 10$, depending on the adopted model variation. We present a statistical framework that enables rapid tests of astrophysical predictions against forecasted observations from next-generation gravitational-wave detectors. By quantifying variations in the binary black-hole merger-rate density between the target redshift and the local Universe, our approach maps evolutionary trends across parameter space and estimates the detection statistics required to distinguish genuine astrophysical variations from statistical fluctuations.

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

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a target redshift z_t, defined as the epoch at which >90% of stars form with Z < 0.1 Z_⊙, obtained by reconstructing the cosmic star-formation rate density versus iron abundance. It notes that this reconstruction is non-unique due to different empirical scaling relations, yielding z_t ranging from ~4 to >10. The authors present a statistical framework that quantifies variations in the binary black-hole merger-rate density between z_t and the local Universe to map evolutionary trends and estimate the number of detections needed to distinguish astrophysical signals from fluctuations, using forecasts for next-generation detectors such as Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer.

Significance. If the framework can be made robust against the model dependence in z_t, it would offer a practical statistical tool for connecting future high-redshift gravitational-wave observations to metallicity-dependent black-hole formation channels. The explicit recognition that z_t is not unique is a positive feature, but the absence of any propagation or marginalization of this uncertainty into the forecasted detection statistics limits the immediate utility of the quantitative claims.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statistical framework is built around comparisons 'between the target redshift and the local Universe,' yet z_t itself spans ~4 to >10 depending on the adopted scaling relations. No procedure is described for marginalizing over this range or for propagating the resulting variation into the estimated detection numbers required to distinguish trends from Poisson fluctuations.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'maps evolutionary trends across parameter space' without identifying the specific parameters (e.g., metallicity threshold, star-formation fraction) that are varied in the framework.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments on the manuscript. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statistical framework is built around comparisons 'between the target redshift and the local Universe,' yet z_t itself spans ~4 to >10 depending on the adopted scaling relations. No procedure is described for marginalizing over this range or for propagating the resulting variation into the estimated detection numbers required to distinguish trends from Poisson fluctuations.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript does not provide an explicit procedure for marginalizing over the model-dependent range of z_t (~4 to >10) or for propagating this uncertainty into the forecasted detection statistics. The text already notes the non-uniqueness of z_t arising from different empirical scaling relations, and the framework is constructed to be applied for any chosen z_t. To address the referee's point, we will revise the manuscript by adding a dedicated paragraph (likely in Section 3 or the discussion) that (i) illustrates how the required number of detections varies across the reported z_t range and (ii) outlines a simple procedure for users to bracket results by evaluating the framework at the bounding values of z_t. This will make the quantitative forecasts more transparent without altering the core statistical approach. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: statistical framework is independent of z_t reconstruction

full rationale

The paper defines z_t externally via reconstruction of cosmic SFRD(Z) from empirical scaling relations (explicitly noted as non-unique), then introduces a separate statistical framework to quantify merger-rate density variations between that z_t and the local Universe for testing astrophysical predictions. No equation or claim reduces a reported variation or detection statistic to a fitted input inside the same model, nor relies on self-citation for a load-bearing uniqueness result. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The approach rests on empirical scaling relations between star-formation rate density and iron abundance that are acknowledged to be non-unique; the 0.1 Z_⊙ and 90% thresholds are introduced without independent justification beyond the definition.

free parameters (2)
  • Metallicity threshold 0.1 Z_⊙
    Chosen to demarcate metal-poor progenitors; no derivation or external calibration supplied in the abstract.
  • 90% star-formation fraction
    Arbitrary cutoff used to define the target epoch.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Iron-group elements govern metallicity effects on stellar evolution, making metallicity a key tracer that leaves a strong imprint on the black-hole population.
    Invoked directly in the abstract as the physical basis for the entire targeting strategy.
invented entities (1)
  • Target redshift z_t no independent evidence
    purpose: To isolate mergers originating from metal-poor environments in a straightforward way.
    Newly defined quantity whose value depends on non-unique empirical reconstructions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5801 in / 1486 out tokens · 37255 ms · 2026-06-28T09:05:14.653835+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

104 extracted references · 43 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Abac, A. G. et al. 2025 [arXiv:2508.18083]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Abac, A. G. et al. 2026a [arXiv:2605.27226]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [3]

    Abac, A. G. et al. 2026b, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2026, 081 [arXiv:2503.12263]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  4. [4]

    P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2016, Astrophys. J. Lett., 833, L1 [arXiv:1602.03842]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    D., Acernese, F., et al

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Acernese, F., et al. 2023, Phys. Rev. X, 13, 011048 [arXiv:2111.03634]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Aghanim, N. et al. 2020, Astron. Astrophys., 641, A6 [arXiv:1807.06209]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Banagiri, S., Thrane, E., & Lasky, P. D. 2025 [arXiv:2509.15646]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    & Antonini, F

    Barber, J. & Antonini, F. 2025, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 538, 639 [arXiv:2410.03832]

    arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    L., et al

    Belczynski, K., Bulik, T., Fryer, C. L., et al. 2010a, Astrophys. J., 714, 1217 [arXiv:0904.2784]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [10]

    2010b, Astrophys

    Belczynski, K., Dominik, M., Bulik, T., et al. 2010b, Astrophys. J. Lett., 715, L138 [arXiv:1004.0386]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    P., Broekgaarden, F

    Boesky, A. P., Broekgaarden, F. S., & Berger, E. 2024, Astrophys. J., 976, 23 [arXiv:2405.01623]

    arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    2021, Class

    Borhanian, S. 2021, Class. Quantum Grav., 38, 175014 [arXiv:2010.15202]

    arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    Branchesi, M., Maggiore, M., Alonso, D., et al. 2023, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2023, 068 [arXiv:2303.15923]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    S., Berger, E., Stevenson, S., et al

    Broekgaarden, F. S., Berger, E., Stevenson, S., et al. 2022, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 516, 5737 [arXiv:2112.05763]

    arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    E., & Farr, W

    Callister, T., Fishbach, M., Holz, D. E., & Farr, W. M. 2020, Astrophys. J. Lett., 896, L32 [arXiv:2003.12152]

    arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    E., Miller, J., et al

    Chen, H.-Y ., Holz, D. E., Miller, J., et al. 2021, Class. Quantum Grav., 38, 055010 [arXiv:1709.08079]

    arXiv 2021

  17. [17]

    Chowdhury, S. R. & Santra, D. 2024 [arXiv:2411.11902] Chru´sli´nska, M. 2024, Annalen der Physik, 536, 2200170 [arXiv:2206.10622] Chru´sli´nska, M., Curti, M., Pakmor, R., et al. 2025 [arXiv:2511.15782]

    arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    & Nelemans, G

    Chruslinska, M. & Nelemans, G. 2019, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 488, 5300 [arXiv:1907.11243]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    2019, Mon

    Chruslinska, M., Nelemans, G., & Belczynski, K. 2019, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 482, 5012 [arXiv:1811.03565] Chru´sli´nska, M., Nelemans, G., Boco, L., & Lapi, A. 2021, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 508, 4994 [arXiv:2109.06187] Chru´sli´nska, M., Pakmor, R., Matthee, J., & Matsuno, T. 2024, Astron. Astrophys., 686, A186 [arXiv:2308.00023]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  20. [20]

    Corelli, A., Gerosa, D., Mould, M., & Fabbri, C. M. 2026 [arXiv:2603.00239] de Mink, S. E. & Mandel, I. 2016, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 460, 3545 [arXiv:1603.02291] Di Carlo, U. N., Mapelli, M., Giacobbo, N., et al. 2020, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 498, 495 [arXiv:2004.09525]

    arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    2012, Astrophys

    Dominik, M., Belczynski, K., Fryer, C., et al. 2012, Astrophys. J., 759, 52 [arXiv:1202.4901] du Buisson, L., Marchant, P., Podsiadlowski, P., et al. 2020, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 499, 5941 [arXiv:2002.11630]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  22. [22]

    J., Stanway, E

    Eldridge, J. J., Stanway, E. R., & Tang, P. N. 2019, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 482, 870 [arXiv:1807.07659]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  23. [23]

    X., Afle, C., et al

    Evans, M., Adhikari, R. X., Afle, C., et al. 2021 [arXiv:2109.09882]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    M., Fishbach, M., & Holz, D

    Farah, A. M., Fishbach, M., & Holz, D. E. 2024, Astrophys. J., 962, 69 [arXiv:2308.05102]

    arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    H., Meynet, G., & Eldridge, J

    Farrell, E., Groh, J. H., Meynet, G., & Eldridge, J. J. 2022, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 512, 4116 [arXiv:2109.02488]

    arXiv 2022

  26. [26]

    1997, A Compendium of Conjugate Priors, www.johndcook.com/CompendiumOfConjugatePriors.pdf

    Fink, D. 1997, A Compendium of Conjugate Priors, www.johndcook.com/CompendiumOfConjugatePriors.pdf

    1997

  27. [27]

    E., & Farr, W

    Fishbach, M., Holz, D. E., & Farr, W. M. 2018, Astrophys. J. Lett., 863, L41 [arXiv:1805.10270]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  28. [28]

    L., Belczynski, K., Wiktorowicz, G., et al

    Fryer, C. L., Belczynski, K., Wiktorowicz, G., et al. 2012, Astrophys. J., 749, 91 [arXiv:1110.1726]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  29. [29]

    Gallegos-Garcia, M., Berry, C. P. L., Marchant, P., & Kalogera, V . 2021, Astro- phys. J., 922, 110 [arXiv:2107.05702] García-Quirós, C., Colleoni, M., Husa, S., et al. 2020, Phys. Rev. D, 102, 064002 [arXiv:2001.10914]

    arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    2018, Phys

    Gerosa, D., Berti, E., O’Shaughnessy, R., et al. 2018, Phys. Rev. D, 98, 084036 [arXiv:1808.02491]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    2020, Phys

    Gerosa, D., Pratten, G., & Vecchio, A. 2020, Phys. Rev. D, 102, 103020 [arXiv:2007.06585]

    arXiv 2020

  32. [32]

    & Mapelli, M

    Giacobbo, N. & Mapelli, M. 2018, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 480, 2011 [arXiv:1806.00001]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  33. [33]

    2018, Mon

    Giacobbo, N., Mapelli, M., & Spera, M. 2018, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 474, 2959 [arXiv:1711.03556]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [34]

    2005, Astron

    Greggio, L. 2005, Astron. Astrophys., 441, 1055 [arXiv:astro-ph/0504376]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  35. [35]

    D., & Thrane, E

    Guttman, N., Payne, E., Lasky, P. D., & Thrane, E. 2026, Astrophys. J., 996, 144 [arXiv:2509.09876]

    arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    L., Woosley, S

    Heger, A., Fryer, C. L., Woosley, S. E., Langer, N., & Hartmann, D. H. 2003, Astrophys. J., 591, 288 [arXiv:astro-ph/0212469]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  37. [37]

    2025a, Phys

    Heinzel, J., Mould, M., Álvarez-López, S., & Vitale, S. 2025a, Phys. Rev. D, 111, 063043 [arXiv:2406.16813]

    arXiv

  38. [38]

    2025b, Phys

    Heinzel, J., Mould, M., & Vitale, S. 2025b, Phys. Rev. D, 111, L061305 [arXiv:2406.16844]

    arXiv

  39. [39]

    D., van Son, L

    Hendriks, D. D., van Son, L. A. C., Renzo, M., Izzard, R. G., & Farmer, R. 2023, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 526, 4130 [arXiv:2309.09339]

    arXiv 2023

  40. [40]

    2025, Mon

    Hirschi, R., Goodman, K., Meynet, G., et al. 2025, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 543, 2796 [arXiv:2508.21233]

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    & Maggiore, M

    Iacovelli, F. & Maggiore, M. 2024, Primordial Black Holes (Springer) [arXiv:2407.21442]

    arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    Iglesias, C. A. & Rogers, F. J. 1996, Astrophys. J., 464, 943

    1996

  43. [43]

    2023, Mon

    Iorio, G., Mapelli, M., Costa, G., et al. 2023, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 524, 426 [arXiv:2211.11774]

    arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    L., Kotz, S., & Balakrishnan, N

    Johnson, N. L., Kotz, S., & Balakrishnan, N. 1994, Continuous univariate distri- butions (Wiley)

    1994

  45. [45]

    J., Caudill, S., Creighton, J

    Kapadia, S. J., Caudill, S., Creighton, J. D. E., et al. 2020, Class. Quantum Grav., 37, 045007 [arXiv:1903.06881]

    arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

    J., Nicholls, D

    Kewley, L. J., Nicholls, D. C., & Sutherland, R. S. 2019, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 57, 511 [arXiv:1910.09730] Kishore Roy, S., van Son, L. A. C., & Farr, W. M. 2025, Class. Quantum Grav., 42, 225008 [arXiv:2507.01086]

    arXiv 2019

  47. [47]

    2018, Astron

    Klencki, J., Moe, M., Gladysz, W., et al. 2018, Astron. Astrophys., 619, A77 [arXiv:1808.07889]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  48. [48]

    G., & Chruslinska, M

    Klencki, J., Nelemans, G., Istrate, A. G., & Chruslinska, M. 2021, Astron. Astro- phys., 645, A54 [arXiv:2006.11286]

    arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    G., & Pols, O

    Klencki, J., Nelemans, G., Istrate, A. G., & Pols, O. 2020, Astron. Astrophys., 638, A55 [arXiv:2004.00628]

    arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    2026, Astron

    Klencki, J., Podsiadlowski, P., Langer, N., et al. 2026, Astron. Astrophys., 706, A296 [arXiv:2505.08860]

    arXiv 2026

  51. [51]

    1988, Parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in linear models (Springer-Verlag)

    Koch, K.-R. 1988, Parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in linear models (Springer-Verlag)

    1988

  52. [52]

    P., Pauldrach, A., & Puls, J

    Kudritzki, R. P., Pauldrach, A., & Puls, J. 1987, Astron. Astrophys., 173, 293

    1987

  53. [53]

    2024, Cosmic Ex- plorer Strain and Displacement Sensitivity, dcc.cosmicexplorer.org/cgi- bin/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=T2000017

    Kuns, K., Fulda, P., Barsotti, L., & Matthew, E. 2024, Cosmic Ex- plorer Strain and Displacement Sensitivity, dcc.cosmicexplorer.org/cgi- bin/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=T2000017

    2024

  54. [54]

    2025, Astron

    Lalleman, M., Turbang, K., Callister, T., & van Remortel, N. 2025, Astron. Astrophys., 698, A85 [arXiv:2501.10295]

    arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    R., & Hopkins, P

    Lamberts, A., Garrison-Kimmel, S., Clausen, D. R., & Hopkins, P. F. 2016, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 463, L31 [arXiv:1605.08783]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  56. [56]

    & Norman, C

    Langer, N. & Norman, C. A. 2006, Astrophys. J. Lett., 638, L63 [arXiv:astro- ph/0512271]

    arXiv 2006

  57. [57]

    & Dickinson, M

    Madau, P. & Dickinson, M. 2014, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 52, 415 [arXiv:1403.0007]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  58. [58]

    & Mannucci, F

    Maiolino, R. & Mannucci, F. 2019, Astron. Astrophys. Rev., 27, 3 [arXiv:1811.09642]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  59. [59]

    2023, Phys

    Mancarella, M., Iacovelli, F., & Gerosa, D. 2023, Phys. Rev. D, 107, L101302 [arXiv:2303.16323]

    arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    & de Mink, S

    Mandel, I. & de Mink, S. E. 2016, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 458, 2634 [arXiv:1601.00007]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  61. [61]

    & Farmer, A

    Mandel, I. & Farmer, A. 2022, Phys. Rep., 955, 1 [arXiv:1806.05820]

    arXiv 2022

  62. [62]

    M., & Gair, J

    Mandel, I., Farr, W. M., & Gair, J. R. 2019, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 486, 1086 [arXiv:1809.02063]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  63. [63]

    2016, Mon

    Mapelli, M. 2016, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 459, 3432 [arXiv:1604.03559]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  64. [64]

    2021, Handbook of Gravitational Wave Astronomy (Springer), 16

    Mapelli, M. 2021, Handbook of Gravitational Wave Astronomy (Springer), 16

    2021

  65. [65]

    2009, Mon

    Mapelli, M., Colpi, M., & Zampieri, L. 2009, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 395, L71 [arXiv:0902.3540]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  66. [66]

    2020, Astrophys

    Mapelli, M., Spera, M., Montanari, E., et al. 2020, Astrophys. J., 888, 76 [arXiv:1909.01371]

    arXiv 2020

  67. [67]

    2013, Mon

    Mapelli, M., Zampieri, L., Ripamonti, E., & Bressan, A. 2013, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 429, 2298 [arXiv:1211.6441]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  68. [68]

    Marchant, P., Pappas, K. M. W., Gallegos-Garcia, M., et al. 2021, Astron. Astro- phys., 650, A107 [arXiv:2103.09243]

    arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    2019, Astrophys

    Marchant, P., Renzo, M., Farmer, R., et al. 2019, Astrophys. J., 882, 36 [arXiv:1810.13412] 12

    arXiv 2019

  70. [70]

    2025 [arXiv:2507.17052]

    Merritt, J., Stevenson, S., Sander, A., et al. 2025 [arXiv:2507.17052]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    Moriya, T. J. & Langer, N. 2015, Astron. Astrophys., 573, A18 [arXiv:1410.4557]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  72. [72]

    J., Vigna-Gómez, A., Stevenson, S., et al

    Neijssel, C. J., Vigna-Gómez, A., Stevenson, S., et al. 2019, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 490, 3740 [arXiv:1906.08136]

    arXiv 2019

  73. [73]

    Ng, K. K. Y ., Chen, S., Goncharov, B., et al. 2022, Astrophys. J. Lett., 931, L12 [arXiv:2108.07276] O’Shaughnessy, R., Kalogera, V ., & Belczynski, K. 2010, Astrophys. J., 716, 615 [arXiv:0908.3635]

    arXiv 2022

  74. [74]

    M., Hamann, W.-R., et al

    Pauli, D., Oskinova, L. M., Hamann, W.-R., et al. 2025, Astron. Astrophys., 697, A114 [arXiv:2504.07073]

    arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    A., Tanvir, N

    Perley, D. A., Tanvir, N. R., Hjorth, J., et al. 2016, Astrophys. J., 817, 8 [arXiv:1504.02479]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  76. [76]

    2023, Mon

    Popesso, P., Concas, A., Cresci, G., et al. 2023, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 519, 1526 [arXiv:2203.10487]

    arXiv 2023

  77. [77]

    2024, Astron

    Rinaldi, S., Del Pozzo, W., Mapelli, M., Lorenzo-Medina, A., & Dent, T. 2024, Astron. Astrophys., 684, A204 [arXiv:2310.03074]

    arXiv 2024

  78. [78]

    2023, Mon

    Romagnolo, A., Belczynski, K., Klencki, J., et al. 2023, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 525, 706 [arXiv:2211.15800]

    arXiv 2023

  79. [79]

    C., & Belczynski, K

    Romagnolo, A., Gormaz-Matamala, A. C., & Belczynski, K. 2024, Astrophys. J. Lett., 964, L23 [arXiv:2311.18841]

    arXiv 2024

  80. [80]

    2020, Astrophys

    Safarzadeh, M., Biscoveanu, S., & Loeb, A. 2020, Astrophys. J., 901, 137 [arXiv:2004.12999]

    arXiv 2020

Showing first 80 references.