Slingshot on compact binaries in the nuclear region of galaxies as the origin of large offset gamma-ray bursts

Cl\'ecio R. Bom; Davi C. Rodrigues; Juan C. Rodr\'iguez-Ram\'irez; Viviane Alfradique

REVIEW

Slingshot on compact binaries in the nuclear region of galaxies as the origin of large offset gamma-ray bursts

Juan C. Rodríguez-Ramírez, Viviane Alfradique, Clécio R. Bom, Davi C. Rodrigues

High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena · Submitted 1 Oct 2026 · 91 references

Pith's verdict: A new slingshot channel for extreme-offset GRBs, internally consistent but with quantitative fractions hinging on the circular-orbit premise and on sampling priors; worth a serious referee.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on October 2, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 6 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID2610.01850 (version 1)

Pith IDTPP2BZHK, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationCl\'ecio R. Bom, Davi C. Rodrigues, Juan C. Rodr\'iguez-Ram\'irez, Viviane Alfradique. "Slingshot on compact binaries in the nuclear region of galaxies as the origin of large offset gamma-ray bursts." arXiv:2610.01850 (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TPP2BZHK

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

The genuinely new piece is applying the gravitational slingshot to compact NSX binaries -- NS-NS, NS-WD, NS-BH -- as a channel for extreme-offset GRBs and kilonovae, and deriving the offset hierarchy that follows from the mass-dependence of the GW merger time. The natal-kick channel struggles to produce bound binaries with tens-of-kpc offsets, so this is a plausible alternative and a testable one: the mass-ordering of offsets is a sharp prediction. The analytical machinery is standard and the paper does it carefully: Hill-sphere slingshot, tidal-heating impulse, Zwick merger times, and multi-component potentials. Appendix C checks energy and angular-momentum conservation numerically, and the derivations in Sections 2-3 are internally consistent. That is real evidence the authors are on solid ground.

The soft spots are proportionate. The stress-test concern about Eq. 7 is real but already acknowledged in Section 5: the whole post-slingshot speed distribution assumes both the NSX binary and the secondary BH move on circular, coplanar, same-radius Keplerian orbits before the encounter. Real nuclear binaries will have eccentric, inclined, eccentric orbits at varied radii, and that changes which systems survive and escape. The 30-45% beyond-100-kpc fractions should be read as conditional on that premise, not as a robust prediction. That is not a flaw in the internal logic; it is a limitation on the quantitative claim, and the authors say so.

Two other things. First, there is no quantitative comparison to the natal-kick channel or to observed extreme-offset GRB rates. The paper establishes feasibility, not competitiveness. That is fine for an exploratory study, but it should be stated more sharply than the abstract does. Second, the eccentricity excitation is an angular-averaged rms estimate that feeds a very steep merger-time dependence; the offset numbers carry more uncertainty than the prose suggests. Minor mechanical issues: the citation [87] in Appendix B is misattributed (the GW170817 discovery paper is cited for a size-relation claim), and the generative-AI declaration is empty. Both are easy fixes.

The math, the internal consistency, and the citation pattern are otherwise solid. This paper deserves a serious referee and likely publication after revision that (a) explicitly frames the 30-45% numbers as conditional on the circular-orbit premise and sampling priors, and (b) adds a basic comparison with observed offset distributions or natal-kick baselines. It is a genuine new application with a testable hierarchy, and the authors are honest about what it does not do. I would engage with it.

What would settle it

A concrete test would be to recompute the post-slingshot speed distribution with pre-encounter orbits drawn from realistic eccentric and inclined distributions (for example, eccentricities of 0.2–0.8 typical of centrophilic nuclear orbits) instead of the circular co-Keplerian assumption, and check whether $F_{\rm esc}>1$ and the roughly 30% fraction of >100 kpc mergers survive. If the extreme-offset fractions collapse below a few percent under realistic orbital anisotropy, the mechanism fails as a general channel. Observationally, a decisive check is whether a statistically significant sample of extreme-offset kilonova GRBs (beyond GRB 230307A) shows the predicted mass hierarchy — NS-WD and NS-NS at the largest offsets, NS-BH closer to hosts — once progenitor masses are inferred from light curves or ejecta masses.

Referee report

Significance

If the quantitative claims survive the robustness checks requested below, this is a valuable new candidate channel for extreme-offset transients: it sidesteps the natal-kick fine-tuning problem highlighted for events such as GRB 230307A and produces a falsifiable, mass-ordered offset hierarchy that can be confronted with the growing sample of hostless and large-offset GRBs and kilonovae. The paper deserves credit for several strengths: the analytic derivations in Section 2 and Appendix A are standard impulse and tidal-heating physics and are internally consistent; Appendix C provides machine-checked energy and angular-momentum conservation diagnostics for the orbit integrations; the mass hierarchy is an emergent consequence of t_GW scaling with total mass, not a fitted outcome; and the rate normalization through a reference occupancy N_b,X is stated transparently with a linear rescaling relation.

Major objections (3)

[Section 3, Eqs. (31)-(35), text after Eq. (35)] The merger-time prescription as printed is internally inconsistent, and since criterion (48) (t_GW < 10^10 yr) directly shapes the CCDFs of Figs. 8 and 9 and the distributions of Fig. 9, this is load-bearing. First, R_Z = 8(1 - sqrt(1 - e_b,ej)) in Eq. (33) vanishes at e_b,ej = 0, so a circular binary would receive t_GW = 0 and trivially satisfy criterion (48); a correction factor should tend to unity as e tends to zero, so Eq. (33) appears misprinted. Second, using Eqs. (31)-(35) as printed with a_b,ej = 10 R_sun and e_b,ej = 0.5, I obtain t_GW approximately 3 x 10^12 yr for the 1.4 + 1.4 M_sun case and approximately 3 x 10^10 yr for the 1.4 + 20 M_sun case, verified against the standard Peters constant through the known roughly 85-90 Myr merger time of J0737-3039A; the text quotes 83 Gyr and 0.87 Gyr, respectively, a factor of about 30-40 in each case, and the two quoted values are also mutually inconsistent with the mass scaling of Eq. (32) at the roughly 15% level. Please verify which merger-time formula the simulation actually implements, correct the printed equation and the illustrative values, and confirm that the selection (48) and the t_GW distributions in Fig. 9 are unaffected.
[Section 2.1, Eq. (7); Section 3.2; Section 5 [b264]] The quantitative headline, namely the 30-45% of successful ejections merging beyond 100 kpc (Fig. 8 and the abstract), is computed from a post-slingshot velocity distribution whose kernel is Eq. (7), which assumes that both the NSX binary and the secondary black hole move on circular Keplerian orbits at the same radius r0 before the encounter. This single premise propagates into the F_esc distribution (Eqs. 16-19), the escape condition (47), the tidal-survival and eccentricity rates (Eqs. 25-29), and the orbit initial conditions (Eq. 42). The authors acknowledge the simplification in Section 5 [b264], but what remains unresolved is its quantitative impact: for a nuclear star cluster the binary population is dispersion-supported with speeds of order sigma*, while a secondary SMBH in the final-parsec phase can be on an eccentric or inspiraling orbit, and AGN-disc populations are partially co-rotating and sheared. Under the paper's own premise, uniform theta_e sampling is the correct physical prior, but for a dispersion-supported population the prior would become uniform in cos(theta_e), shifting probability mass toward small theta_e and reducing the F_esc > 1 fraction and the resulting offsets. I ask for a targeted re-run with v_b and v_2 drawn from, e.g., a Maxwellian with sigma* from Eq. (43) or from eccentric orbits with the same binding energy, keeping all other sampling choices fixed, with the resulting 50 kpc and 100 kpc CCDF fractions reported. This directly tests how much of the abstract claim is an artifact of the Eq. (7) kernel. The authors acknowledge this: “For analytical convenience, we parameterised the scat- tering encounters by assuming that both the perturber and the NSX binaries can be treated as test particles relative to the cen- tral SMBH, and that, prior to the encounters, they move with non-relativistic speeds and Keplerian orbits around the primary SMBH.”
[Section 2.4 and Appendix A [b306]; Eq. (35)] The merger time on which the extreme-offset selection rests is computed with the post-encounter eccentricity of Eqs. (29)-(30), which starts from an assumed nearly circular pre-encounter internal orbit [b306]. Observed NS-NS binaries display a broad eccentricity distribution, with systems such as B1913+16 at e about 0.62, and the factor f_e in Eq. (35) scales as (1 - e^2)^(-7/2), so a pre-existing eccentricity of 0.3-0.6 shortens t_GW by factors of a few to about an order of magnitude relative to the circular-start estimate. Because the >100 kpc tail of Figs. 8-9 is preferentially populated by binaries with t_GW in the 0.1-10 Gyr window, ignoring pre-existing internal eccentricity is likely to inflate the reported extreme-offset fractions for NS-NS, and to a lesser extent NS-WD, systems. The assumption is stated, but its quantitative effect is not bounded; an estimate that marginalizes over a typical double-neutron-star eccentricity distribution, or at least brackets e_0 in 0.1-0.6 and combines it with the tidal excitation of Eq. (30), would show how sensitive the CCDFs are to this premise.

Minor objections (6)

[Section 1] The sentence 'The outline of this paper is organiased' contains a typo; it should read 'organised'.
[Section 5 versus Section 3] The summary paragraph in Section 5 states that NS-NS systems peak 'at tens of kpc', whereas Section 3 [b197] states that the bulk of the NS-NS distributions lies around 1-10 kpc; please align the summary with Fig. 7.
[Appendix C] The text states that Fig. C.11 shows the fractional variations for 10^4 simulated orbits, while the figure caption says 5 x 10^4; please reconcile these numbers and state how they relate to N_ev = 5 x 10^5 used in Section 3.2 and Section 4.
[Section 3.2] The parameter list renders the sampled masses as '~m1' and '~m2', apparently a LaTeX tilde rendering artifact, and the line for the binary separation reads 'log(a_b) in [log(a_b,max), log(a_b,min)]' with reversed endpoints; both should be fixed.
[References] Reference [87] duplicates reference [2] (the GW170817 PRL citation), and the page range in reference [92] is corrupted as '203Y225' and should be '203-225'.
[Abstract and Section 5] The phrase 'approximately 30-45% of successful ejections' aggregates the NS-NS (30-40%) and NS-WD (35-45%) values and omits that the NS-BH fraction at 100 kpc is about 20%; please quote the per-class values, as in the Fig. 8 discussion.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Gravitational slingshots off a secondary black hole inside a galaxy's nucleus can eject neutron-star binaries that merge hundreds of kiloparsecs from their host, offering a non-fine-tuned origin for extreme-offset gamma-ray bursts.

The reading

Extreme-offset gamma-ray bursts, whose kilonova detections imply a neutron-star merger but whose locations lie tens of kiloparsecs from any plausible host, are usually attributed to natal kicks from asymmetric supernovae. This paper argues that a less fine-tuned channel exists: a compact binary (NS-NS, NS-BH, or NS-WD) orbiting near a galactic nucleus can be gravitationally slingshotted past an intermediate-mass or secondary supermassive black hole, gaining a centre-of-mass speed above the local escape velocity while remaining internally bound. The authors derive the velocity-gain and survival conditions analytically, then integrate the post-encounter orbits in realistic galaxy potentials. Their parameter sampling finds that about 30–45% of successful ejections merge at three-dimensional distances beyond 100 kpc within roughly 0.1–10 Gyr, with a mass hierarchy set by the gravitational-wave merger time: NS-WD and NS-NS travel farthest, NS-BH closest. If correct, this gives a candidate explanation for extreme-offset transients such as GRB 230307A that does not require fine-tuned binary configurations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dimensionless post-encounter speed $F_{\rm esc}$ (Eqs. 16–19), which expresses the ejected binary's centre-of-mass speed in units of the local escape speed $\sqrt{2GM_1/r_0}$ from the primary black hole. $F_{\rm esc}$ is built from three geometric ingredients: the angle $\theta_e$ between the pre-encounter velocities of the binary and the perturber (which, under the circular-Keplerian assumption, fixes the relative encounter speed via Eq. 7), the dimensionless impact parameter $\beta = \zeta/R_H$, and the mass-ratio-scaled quantity $\epsilon = R_B/R_H$. The slingshot deflection angle $\theta_s$ (Eq. 9), derived from classical hyperbolic two-body scattering, feeds into $F_{\rm esc}$ together with an azimuthal angle $\phi_s$ that encodes the three-dimensional orientation of the encounter. Paired with $F_{\rm esc}$ is the tidal survival condition $\langle\Delta E\rangle/|E_b| < 0.25$ (Eq. 27), which selects encounters that heat the binary's internal orbit without ionising it; surviving binaries see their semi-major axis widen by up to roughly 33% and their eccentricity grow to about 0.63. The merger offset then follows from the gravitational-wave merger time (Eq. 31), which depends on the tidally modified semi-major axis and eccentricity.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a gravitational slingshot off a secondary massive black hole, acting within the sphere of influence of the primary supermassive black hole, can eject compact NSX binaries as internally bound systems with centre-of-mass speeds up to roughly twice the local escape speed ($F_{\rm esc}$ up to $3/\sqrt{2}$), and that a substantial fraction of these ejected binaries merge at extreme offsets. Concretely, the complementary cumulative distributions of merger distance show that about 20% of successful NS-BH ejections, 30–40% of NS-NS ejections, and 35–45% of NS-WD ejections coalesce at three-dimensional galactocentric distances exceeding 100 kpc, within 0.1–10 Gyr of ejection. The mass ordering follows directly from the gravitational-wave inspiral time, which scales as $(m_1+m_2)^{-3}$: the heaviest systems (NS-BH) merge soonest and travel least, while the lightest (NS-WD) survive longest and reach the largest offsets. The authors stress that the mechanism's absolute rate is not predicted — it is normalised to a reference occupancy of 30 binaries per class — but its efficiency and offset outcomes are quantified, motivating it as a candidate channel for extreme-offset transients.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that, before the encounter, both the compact binary and the secondary black hole move on circular Keplerian orbits at the same speed $\sqrt{GM_1/r_0}$ around the primary SMBH, so that the entire encounter is compressed into a single angle $\theta_e$; the authors acknowledge this circular-orbit simplification is adopted for analytical convenience (statements [b75], [b264]). If real nuclear binaries sit on eccentric, inclined, or non-corotating orbits, the post-slingshot speed distribution and the 30–45% extreme-offset fractions change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Extreme-offset GRBs and kilonovae with host offsets of tens to hundreds of kiloparsecs, including GRB 230307A, can be produced without fine-tuned natal kicks if an IMBH or secondary SMBH coexists with a nuclear compact-binary population.
The channel predicts a mass hierarchy in offset: NS-WD and NS-NS mergers should be found at larger galactocentric distances than NS-BH mergers, because lighter systems have longer gravitational-wave inspiral times.
Extreme offsets beyond 100 kpc occur in roughly 30–45% of successful ejections for NS-NS and NS-WD systems, so such events need not be rare per successful ejection.
For central SMBH masses of $10^6$–$10^8\,M_\odot$, the reference ejection rate is of order $10^{-7}$–$10^{-6}$ per year per galaxy (for 30 binaries per class), and scales linearly with the nuclear NSX occupancy.
The required scatterer need not still be present when the ejected binary merges, since the secondary SMBH may itself coalesce with the primary on comparable or shorter timescales.

Reading between the lines

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

The 30–45% extreme-offset fractions are conditional on circular, co-Keplerian pre-encounter orbits; if real nuclear binaries move on eccentric or inclined orbits, both the speed-gain distribution and the fractions will shift, and the hierarchy could either sharpen or wash out — recomputing with eccentric orbits is a direct next step.
The mechanism implies a population of internally bound, hyper-velocity compact binaries in galaxy halos that never merge within a Hubble time; this low-mass tail would be an invisible reservoir of displaced binaries whose presence could be probed statistically through the gravitational-wave events they eventually do produce.
A falsifiable observational signature: if extreme-offset kilonova GRBs preferentially associate with host galaxies showing recent-merger morphology (which seeds the secondary SMBH), the channel gains support, whereas hostless or merger-quiet hosts would favour natal kicks or other channels.
The same slingshot physics should apply to black-hole-black-hole binaries, which would produce extreme-offset gravitational-wave mergers with no electromagnetic counterpart — a sub-population of 'orphan' GW events that current searches might be attributing to field binaries.

Original abstract

A growing number of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) have been observed at large projected offsets from the centres of their putative host galaxies, sometimes extending to several tens of kiloparsecs. When the GRB is associated with a kilonova, a compact binary with at least one neutron star is expected to be involved, and the cause of the offset can be attributed to the neutron star natal kick. In this work, we explore an alternative mechanism: the gravitational scattering of compact binaries populating the nuclear region of the host galaxy, by an intermediate-mass black hole or secondary supermassive black hole. We specifically consider populations of neutron star-neutron star (NS-NS), neutron star-black hole (NS-BH), and neutron star-white dwarf (NS-WD) binaries, and analyse the ejection of bound systems from the nuclear region through a gravitational-slingshot effect. We proceed analytically to derive the conditions for binary survival and to parametrise the post-encounter velocity. To quantify the associated merger offsets, we numerically integrate the post-slingshot trajectory of the binary centre-of-mass in host-galaxy potentials that include the primary SMBH, the stellar component, and the dark-matter halo, considering both elliptical-like and spiral-like galaxy profiles. Our parameter sampling shows that NS-NS and NS-WD binaries typically merge farther from the galactic centre than NS-BH systems, with approximately 30-45% of successful ejections merging at three-dimensional distances exceeding 100 kpc; these extreme-offset mergers occur within $\sim$0.1-10 Gyr after ejection. These results motivate the analysed mechanism as a candidate channel for observed extreme-offset transients.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-10-02: 1 request, 6,619 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.13 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.10 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.42 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

A growing number of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) have been observed at large projected offsets from the centres of their putative host galaxies, sometimes extending to several tens of kiloparsecs. When the GRB is associated with a kilonova, a compact binary with at least one neutron star is expected to be involved, and the cause of the offset can be attributed to the neutron star natal kick. In this work, we explore an alternative mechanism: the gravitational scattering of compact binaries populating the nuclear region of the host galaxy, by an intermediate-mass black hole or secondary supermassive black hole. We specifically consider populations of neutron star-neutron star (NS-NS), neutron star-black hole (NS-BH), and neutron star-white dwarf (NS-WD) binaries, and analyse the ejection of bound systems from the nuclear region through a gravitational-slingshot effect. We proceed analytically to derive the conditions for binary survival and to parametrise the post-encounter velocity. To quantify the associated merger offsets, we numerically integrate the post-slingshot trajectory of the binary centre-of-mass in host-galaxy potentials that include the primary SMBH, the stellar component, and the dark-matter halo, considering both elliptical-like and spiral-like galaxy profiles. Our parameter sampling shows that NS-NS and NS-WD binaries typically merge farther from the galactic centre than NS-BH systems, with approximately 30-45% of successful ejections merging at three-dimensional distances exceeding 100 kpc; these extreme-offset mergers occur within $\sim$0.1-10 Gyr after ejection. These results motivate the analysed mechanism as a candidate channel for observed extreme-offset transients.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	A growing number of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) have been observed at large projected offsets from the centres of their putative host galaxies, sometimes extending to several tens of kiloparsecs.	background 1.00	0.07	0.02	asserted 0.99
s1	When the GRB is associated with a kilonova, a compact binary with at least one neutron star is expected to be involved, and the cause of the offset can be attributed to the neutron star natal kick.	background 0.99	0.04	0.03	hedged possibility 0.66
s2	In this work, we explore an alternative mechanism: the gravitational scattering of compact binaries populating the nuclear region of the host galaxy, by an intermediate-mass black hole or secondary supermassive black hole.	contribution 0.98	0.45	0.05	speculative 0.33
s3	We specifically consider populations of neutron star-neutron star (NS-NS), neutron star-black hole (NS-BH), and neutron star-white dwarf (NS-WD) binaries, and analyse the ejection of bound systems from the nuclear region through a gravitational-slingshot effect.	contribution 0.69	0.86	0.04	asserted 0.77
s4	We proceed analytically to derive the conditions for binary survival and to parametrise the post-encounter velocity.	method 0.99	0.96	0.02	asserted 0.73
s5	To quantify the associated merger offsets, we numerically integrate the post-slingshot trajectory of the binary centre-of-mass in host-galaxy potentials that include the primary SMBH, the stellar component, and the dark-matter halo, considering both elliptical-like and spiral-like galaxy profiles.	method 1.00	0.96	0.04	asserted 0.84
s6	Our parameter sampling shows that NS-NS and NS-WD binaries typically merge farther from the galactic centre than NS-BH systems, with approximately 30-45% of successful ejections merging at three-dimensional distances exceeding 100 kpc; these extreme-offset mergers occur within $\sim$0.1-10 Gyr after ejection.	result 1.00	0.97	0.48	asserted 0.99
s7	These results motivate the analysed mechanism as a candidate channel for observed extreme-offset transients.	interpretation 1.00	0.58	0.76	hedged possibility 0.97

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 0.67 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 2.** Schematic of the basis vectors of the three reference frames used in

**Figure 3.** In what follows, we use the notation vx = |⃗vx| for the magnitude of any velocity vector. Conservation of energy and angular momentum gives the eccentricity of the binary COM orbit in the M2−frame as [58] ecc = s 1 +

**Figure 4.** Three-dimensional schematic of the trajectory of the NSX COM

**Figure 5.** Simulated distance from the galaxy centre as a function of time for

**Figure 6.** Initial speeds of the post-slingshot NS–NS binary orbits shown in

**Figure 7.** shows the distributions of merger offsets where we include results for different NSX binary types and the two galaxy potential models described above. The curves in each panel correspond to a fixed NSX binary type, as indicated. Curves of different colours correspond to galaxies with different SMBH masses M1, as indicated, while thick and thin curves correspond to the elliptical and spiral-like galaxy potential models, respectively. The distributions are broad, but they exhibit a clear hierarchy with binary type. NS–WD systems typically merge at relatively large offsets, with…

**Figure 8.** Complementary cumulative distribution functions (CCDFs) corre

**Figure 10.** Ejection rates of successfully ejected NSX binaries as a function of

Showing 8 of the paper's 10 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:2610.01850 by the authors.

References

Works cited (91)

[87]

B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, et al., GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspi- ral, PRL119 (16) (2017) 161101.arXiv:1710.05832, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[1]

A. Goldstein, P. Veres, E. Burns, M. S. Briggs, R. Ham- burg, D. Kocevski, et al., An Ordinary Short Gamma- Ray Burst with Extraordinary Implications: Fermi- GBM Detection of GRB 170817A, ApJL848 (2) (2017) L14.arXiv:1710.05446,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ aa8f41

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[3]

B. D. Metzger, G. Martínez-Pinedo, S. Darbha, E. Quataert, A. Arcones, D. Kasen, et al., Electromag- netic counterparts of compact object mergers powered by the radioactive decay of r-process nuclei, MNRAS406 (4) (2010) 2650–2662.arXiv:1001.5029,doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2010.16864.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[4]

I. Bartos, P. Brady, S. Márka, How gravitational- wave observations can shape the gamma-ray burst paradigm, Classical and Quantum Gravity 30 (12) (2013) 123001.arXiv:1212.2289,doi:10.1088/ 0264-9381/30/12/123001

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[5]

S. S. Kimura, K. Murase, P. Mészáros, K. Kiuchi, High-energy Neutrino Emission from Short Gamma-Ray Bursts: Prospects for Coincident Detection with Gravi- tational Waves, ApJL848 (1) (2017) L4.arXiv:1708. 07075,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8d14

View on Pith doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8d14 2017
[6]

A. Janiuk, Nucleosynthesis of elements in gamma- ray burst engines, A&A 568 (A105) (2014) 7. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423822. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/ 201423822

View on Pith doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423822 2014
[7]

D. Kasen, B. Metzger, J. Barnes, E. Quataert, E. Ramirez- Ruiz, Origin of the heavy elements in binary neutron- star mergers from a gravitational-wave event, Nature 551 (2017) 80–84.doi:10.1038/nature24453. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/nature24453 16 Figure C.11: Time evolution of the fractional variations of the orbital energy and angular-momentum magnitud...

View on Pith doi:10.1038/nature24453 2017
[8]

M. W. Coughlin, T. Dietrich, B. Margalit, B. D. Metzger, Multimessenger bayesian parameter inference of a binary neutron star merger, MNRAS Lett. 489 (2019) L91–L96. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz133. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1093/mnrasl/slz133

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz133 2019
[9]

T. Dietrich, M. W. Coughlin, P. T. H. Pang, M. Bulla, J. Heinzel, L. Issa, et al., Multimessenger constraints on the neutron-star equation of state and the hubble constant, Science 370 (6523) (2020) 1450–1453.doi:10.1126/ science.abb43. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb43

View on Pith doi:10.1126/science.abb43 2020
[10]

M.-H. Chen, L.-X. Li, Q.-H. Chen, R.-C. Hu, E.- W. Liang, Neutron star mergers as the dominant contributor to the production of heavy r-process elements, MNRAS 529 (2) (2024) 1154–1160. arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/mnras/ article-pdf/529/2/1154/56916485/stae475.pdf, doi:10.1093/mnras/stae475. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stae475

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnras/stae475 2024
[11]

B. F. Schutz, Determining the Hubble constant from grav- itational wave observations, Nature 323 (1986) 310.doi: 10.1038/323310a0

View on Pith doi:10.1038/323310a0 1986
[12]

D. E. Holz, S. A. Hughes, Using gravitational-wave stan- dard sirens, ApJ 629 (2005) 15.doi:10.1086/431341. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/431341

View on Pith doi:10.1086/431341 2005
[13]

N. Dalal, D. E. Holz, S. A. Hughes, B. Jain, Short grb and binary black hole standard sirens as a probe of dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 063006. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.063006. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevD.74.063006

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.063006 2006
[14]

B. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, et al., A gravitational- wave standard siren measurement of the Hubble constant, Nature 551 (2017) 85–88.arXiv:1710.05835,doi:10. 1038/nature24471

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[15]

J. C. Rastinejad, B. P. Gompertz, A. J. Levan, W.-f. Fong, M. Nicholl, G. P. Lamb, et al., A kilonova fol- lowing a long-duration gamma-ray burst at 350 Mpc, Na- ture612 (7939) (2022) 223–227.arXiv:2204.10864, doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05390-w

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[16]

Y .-H. Yang, E. Troja, B. O’Connor, C. L. Fryer, M. Im, J. Durbak, et al., A lanthanide-rich kilonova in the af- termath of a long gamma-ray burst, Nature626 (8000) (2024) 742–745.arXiv:2308.00638,doi:10.1038/ s41586-023-06979-5

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[17]

A. J. Levan, B. P. Gompertz, O. S. Salafia, M. Bulla, E. Burns, K. Hotokezaka, et al., Heavy-element produc- tion in a compact object merger observed by JWST, Na- ture626 (8000) (2024) 737–741.arXiv:2307.02098, doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06759-1

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[18]

E. Berger, Short-Duration Gamma-Ray Bursts, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 52 (2014) 43– 105.arXiv:1311.2603,doi:10.1146/ annurev-astro-081913-035926

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[19]

J. S. Bloom, J. X. Prochaska, D. Pooley, C. H. Blake, R. J. Foley, S. Jha, et al., Closing in on a Short-Hard Burst Progenitor: Constraints from Early-Time Optical Imaging and Spectroscopy of a Possible Host Galaxy of GRB 050509b, ApJ638 (1) (2006) 354–368.arXiv: astro-ph/0505480,doi:10.1086/498107

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[20]

S. B. Cenko, D. B. Fox, B. E. Penprase, A. Cucchiara, P. A. Price, E. Berger, et al., GRB 070125: The First Long-Duration Gamma-Ray Burst in a Halo Environment, ApJ677 (1) (2008) 441–447.arXiv:0712.2828,doi: 10.1086/526491

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008
[21]

W. Fong, E. Berger, The Locations of Short Gamma-Ray Bursts as Evidence for Compact Object Binary Progen- itors, ApJ776 (1) (2013) 18.arXiv:1307.0819,doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/18

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[22]

W.-f. Fong, A. E. Nugent, Y . Dong, E. Berger, K. Pa- terson, R. Chornock, et al., Short GRB Host Galaxies. I. Photometric and Spectroscopic Catalogs, Host Asso- ciations, and Galactocentric Offsets, ApJ940 (1) (2022) 56.arXiv:2206.01763,doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ ac91d0

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[23]

J. S. Bloom, D. A. Perley, H. W. Chen, N. Butler, J. X. Prochaska, D. Kocevski, et al., A Putative Early-Type Host Galaxy for GRB 060502B: Implications for the Pro- genitors of Short-Duration Hard-Spectrum Bursts, As- trophys. J. 654 (2007) 878–884.arXiv:astro-ph/ 0607223,doi:10.1086/509114

View on Pith doi:10.1086/509114 2007
[24]

E. Troja, B. O’Connor, Y .-H. Yang, T. M. Gaudin, M. Ya- dav, N. Passaleva, et al., A possible high-redshift origin for the short GRB 061201: implications of a compact bi- nary merger beyond cosmic noon, arXiv e-prints (2026) arXiv:2607.01337arXiv:2607.01337,doi:10.48550/ arXiv.2607.01337

View on Pith Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.01337 2026
[25]

V . Kalogera, Orbital characteristics of binary systems after asymmetric supernova explosions, Astrophys. J. 471 (1996) 352.arXiv:astro-ph/9605186,doi:10. 1086/177974

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[26]

A. Wongwathanarat, H. T. Janka, E. Müller, Three- dimensional neutrino-driven supernovae: Neutron star kicks, spins, and asymmetric ejection of nucleosynthe- sis products, A&A552 (2013) A126.arXiv:1210.8148, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220636

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[27]

T. M. Tauris, R. J. Takens, Runaway velocities of stellar components originating from disrupted binaries via asym- metric supernova explosions, A&A330 (1998) 1047– 1059. 18

View on Pith 1998
[28]

T. M. Tauris, M. Kramer, P. C. C. Freire, N. Wex, H. T. Janka, N. Langer, et al., Formation of Double Neutron Star Systems, ApJ846 (2) (2017) 170.arXiv:1706. 09438,doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7e89

View on Pith doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7e89 2017
[29]

V . Alfradique, R. da Mata, J. C. Rodríguez-Ramírez, C. R. Bom, Multi-wavelength analysis of the progenitor of GRB 230307A via Bayesian model comparison, arXiv e-prints (2025) arXiv:2510.14879arXiv:2510.14879,doi:10. 48550/arXiv.2510.14879

View on Pith doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.14879 2025
[30]

C. R. Bom, D. C. Rodrigues, A. Cortesi, A. E. Araujo- Carvalho, D. Ruschel-Dutra, G. Iorio, et al., Probing the Origin of the Kilonova Candidate GRB 230307A: Anal- ysis of Host Galaxy and Offset, ApJL1001 (2) (2026) L37.arXiv:2512.09036,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ ae4fbe

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[31]

C.-A. Faucher-Giguere, A. Loeb, Pulsar-black hole bi- naries in the Galactic Centre, MNRAS415 (4) (2011) 3951–3961.arXiv:1012.0573,doi:10.1111/j. 1365-2966.2011.19019.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[32]

M. A. Sedda, Dissecting the properties of neutron star - black hole mergers originating in dense star clusters, Commun. Phys. 3 (2020) 43.arXiv:2003.02279,doi: 10.1038/s42005-020-0310-x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[33]

A. Generozov, N. C. Stone, B. D. Metzger, J. P. Os- triker, An overabundance of black hole X-ray binaries in the Galactic Centre from tidal captures, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 478 (3) (2018) 4030–4051.arXiv: 1804.01543,doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1262

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[34]

N. Neumayer, A. Seth, T. Böker, Nuclear star clusters, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review 28 (1) (2020) 4.doi:10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0

View on Pith doi:10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0 2020
[35]

N. Ivanova, C. O. Heinke, F. A. Rasio, K. Belczynski, J. M. Fregeau, Formation and evolution of compact bina- ries in globular clusters - II. Binaries with neutron stars, MNRAS386 (1) (2008) 553–576.arXiv:0706.4096, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13064.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008
[36]

M. J. Benacquista, J. M. B. Downing, Relativistic Bina- ries in Globular Clusters, Living Reviews in Relativity 16 (1) (2013) 4.arXiv:1110.4423,doi:10.12942/ lrr-2013-4

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[37]

F. M. Khan, M. Preto, P. Berczik, I. Berentzen, A. Just, R. Spurzem, Mergers of Unequal-mass Galaxies: Su- permassive Black Hole Binary Evolution and Structure of Merger Remnants, ApJ749 (2) (2012) 147.arXiv: 1202.2124,doi:10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/147

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[38]

A. Gualandris, J. I. Read, W. Dehnen, E. Bortolas, Colli- sionless loss-cone refilling: there is no final parsec prob- lem, MNRAS464 (2) (2017) 2301–2310.arXiv:1609. 09383,doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2528

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2528 2017
[39]

J. Goodman, Self-gravity and quasi-stellar object discs, MNRAS339 (4) (2003) 937–948.arXiv:astro-ph/ 0201001,doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06241. x

View on Pith doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06241 2003
[40]

Y . Levin, Starbursts near supermassive black holes: young stars in the Galactic Centre, and gravitational waves in LISA band, MNRAS374 (2) (2007) 515– 524.arXiv:astro-ph/0603583,doi:10.1111/j. 1365-2966.2006.11155.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2007
[41]

S. Collin, J.-P. Zahn, Star formation in accretion discs: from the Galactic center to active galactic nuclei, A&A477 (2) (2008) 419–435.arXiv:0709.3772,doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078191

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008
[42]

A. Generozov, H. B. Perets, Capture of stars into gaseous discs around massive black holes: alignment, circular- ization, and growth, MNRAS522 (2) (2023) 1763–1778. arXiv:2212.11301,doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1016

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[43]

B. McKernan, K. E. S. Ford, R. O’Shaughnessy, Black hole, neutron star, and white dwarf merger rates in AGN discs, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 498 (3) (2020) 4088–4094.arXiv:2002.00046,doi:10.1093/ mnras/staa2681

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[44]

H. Tagawa, Z. Haiman, B. Kocsis, Formation and Evolution of Compact-object Binaries in AGN Disks, ApJ898 (1) (2020) 25.arXiv:1912.08218,doi:10. 3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[45]

C. J. Conselice, C. Yang, A. F. L. Bluck, The struc- tures of distant galaxies - III. The merger history of over 20000 massive galaxies at z<1.2, MNRAS394 (4) (2009) 1956–1972.arXiv:0812.3237,doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2009.14396.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009
[46]

G. Martin, R. A. Jackson, S. Kaviraj, H. Choi, J. E. G. Devriendt, Y . Dubois, et al., The role of mergers and in- teractions in driving the evolution of dwarf galaxies over cosmic time, MNRAS500 (4) (2021) 4937–4957.arXiv: 2007.07913,doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3443

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[47]

F. M. Khan, D. Fiacconi, L. Mayer, P. Berczik, A. Just, Swift Coalescence of Supermassive Black Holes in Cosmological Mergers of Massive Galaxies, ApJ828 (2) (2016) 73.arXiv:1604.00015,doi:10. 3847/0004-637X/828/2/73

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[48]

D. Merritt, Mass deficits, stalling radii, and the merger histories of elliptical galaxies, The Astrophysical Journal 648 (2) (2006) 976–986.arXiv:astro-ph/0603439, doi:10.1086/506139

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[49]

S. P. Rusli, P. Erwin, R. P. Saglia, J. Thomas, M. Fabri- cius, R. Bender, et al., Depleted galaxy cores and dy- namical black hole masses, The Astronomical Journal 146 (6) (2013) 160.arXiv:1310.5310,doi:10.1088/ 0004-6256/146/6/160. 19

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[50]

A. Merritt, P. van Dokkum, R. Abraham, J. Zhang, The dragonfly nearby galaxies survey. i. substantial variation in the diffuse stellar halos around spiral galaxies, The Astrophysical Journal 830 (2) (2016) 62.arXiv:1606. 08847,doi:10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/62

View on Pith doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/62 2016
[51]

C. Gilhuly, A. Merritt, R. Abraham, S. Danieli, D. Lokhorst, Q. Liu, et al., Stellar halos from the drag- onfly edge-on galaxies survey, The Astrophysical Journal 932 (1) (2022) 44.arXiv:2204.06596,doi:10.3847/ 1538-4357/ac6750

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[52]

X. Siemens, J. Ellis, F. Jenet, J. D. Romano, The stochastic background: scaling laws and time to de- tection for pulsar timing arrays, Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 224015.arXiv:1305.3196,doi:10.1088/ 0264-9381/30/22/224015

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[53]

S. Chen, A. Sesana, C. J. Conselice, Constraining astro- physical observables of galaxy and supermassive black hole binary mergers using pulsar timing arrays, MN- RAS488 (1) (2019) 401–418.arXiv:1810.04184,doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1722

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019
[54]

P. A. Seoane, et al., Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, Living Rev. Rel. 26 (1) (2023) 2.arXiv:2203.06016, doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[55]

G. Agazie, A. Anumarlapudi, A. M. Archibald, P. T. Baker, B. Bécsy, L. Blecha, et al., The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Constraints on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries from the Gravitational-wave Background, ApJL952 (2) (2023) L37.arXiv:2306.16220,doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace18b

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[56]

A. W. Graham, C. A. Onken, E. Athanassoula, F. Combes, An expanded M bh-σdiagram, and a new calibra- tion of active galactic nuclei masses, MNRAS412 (4) (2011) 2211–2228.arXiv:1007.3834,doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2010.18045.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[57]

C. D. Murray, S. F. Dermott, Solar System Dynam- ics, Cambridge University Press, 1999.doi:10.1017/ CBO9781139174817

View on Pith 1999
[58]

A. Fetter, J. Walecka, Theoretical Mechanics of Particles and Continua, Dover Books on Physics, Dover Publica- tions, 2003. URLhttps://books.google.com.br/books?id= olMpStYOlnoC

View on Pith 2003
[59]

M. A. Minovitch, A method for determining interplane- tary free-fall reconnaissance trajectories, Tech. Rep. JPL Technical Report 32-464, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Cal- ifornia Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA, un- published technical report (1961)

View on Pith 1961
[60]

G. A. Flandro, Fast reconnaissance missions to the outer solar system utilizing energy derived from the gravita- tional field of jupiter, Astronautica Acta 12 (4) (1966) 329–337

View on Pith 1966
[61]

A. Sesana, F. Haardt, P. Madau, Interaction of Mas- sive Black Hole Binaries with Their Stellar Environment. I. Ejection of Hypervelocity Stars, ApJ651 (1) (2006) 392–400.arXiv:astro-ph/0604299,doi:10.1086/ 507596

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[62]

J. Binney, S. Tremaine, Galactic Dynamics, 2nd Edition, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008

View on Pith 2008
[63]

P. C. Peters, Gravitational radiation and the motion of two point masses, Phys. Rev. 136 (1964) B1224–B1232. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.136.B1224. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRev.136.B1224

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrev.136.b1224 1964
[64]

L. Zwick, P. R. Capelo, E. Bortolas, L. Mayer, P. Amaro- Seoane, Improved gravitational radiation time-scales: significance for LISA and LIGO-Virgo sources, MN- RAS495 (2) (2020) 2321–2331.arXiv:1911.06024, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[65]

J. Kormendy, L. C. Ho, Coevolution (Or Not) of Super- massive Black Holes and Host Galaxies, ARAA51 (1) (2013) 511–653.arXiv:1304.7762,doi:10.1146/ annurev-astro-082708-101811

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[66]

L. Hernquist, An analytical model for spherical galaxies and bulges, ApJ 356 (1990) 359–364.doi:10.1086/ 168845. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/168845

View on Pith doi:10.1086/168845 1990
[67]

M. Miyamoto, R. Nagai, Three-dimensional models for the distribution of mass in galaxies, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 27 (4) (1975) 533–543. doi:10.1093/pasj/27.4.533

View on Pith doi:10.1093/pasj/27.4.533 1975
[68]

J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk, S. D. M. White, The structure of cold dark matter halos, ApJ 462 (1996) 563–575.doi: 10.1086/177173. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/177173

View on Pith doi:10.1086/177173 1996
[69]

G. Girelli, L. Pozzetti, M. Bolzonella, C. Giocoli, F. Marulli, M. Baldi, The stellar-to-halo mass rela- tion over the past 12 Gyr. I. StandardΛCDM model, A&A634 (2020) A135.arXiv:2001.02230,doi:10. 1051/0004-6361/201936329

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[70]

P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, et al., SciPy 1.0: fun- damental algorithms for scientific computing in Python, Nature Methods 17 (2020) 261–272.doi:10.1038/ s41592-019-0686-2

View on Pith 2020
[71]

K. Stovall, et al., PALFA Discovery of a Highly Rela- tivistic Double Neutron Star Binary, Astrophys. J. Lett. 854 (2) (2018) L22.arXiv:1802.01707,doi:10. 3847/2041-8213/aaad06

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[72]

F. Özel, P. Freire, Masses, Radii, and the Equation of State of Neutron Stars, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 54 (2016) 401–440.arXiv:1603.02698,doi:10.1146/ annurev-astro-081915-023322. 20

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[73]

J. Alsing, H. O. Silva, E. Berti, Evidence for a maximum mass cut-offin the neutron star mass distribution and con- straints on the equation of state, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 478 (1) (2018) 1377–1391.arXiv:1709.07889, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1065

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[74]

P.-E. Tremblay, J. Cummings, J. S. Kalirai, B. T. Gän- sicke, N. Gentile-Fusillo, R. Raddi, The field white dwarf mass distribution, MNRAS461 (2) (2016) 2100–2114. arXiv:1606.05292,doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1447

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[75]

S. Toonen, H. B. Perets, A. P. Igoshev, E. Michaely, Y . Zenati, The demographics of neutron star – white dwarf mergers - Rates, delay-time distributions, and progeni- tors, Astron. Astrophys. 619 (2018) A53.arXiv:1804. 01538,doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833164

View on Pith doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833164 2018
[76]

W. M. Farr, N. Sravan, A. Cantrell, L. Kreidberg, C. D. Bailyn, I. Mandel, et al., The Mass Distribution of Stellar- mass Black Holes, ApJ741 (2) (2011) 103.arXiv:1011. 1459,doi:10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/103

View on Pith doi:10.1088/0004-637x/741/2/103 2011
[77]

R. Abbott, et al., Observation of Gravitational Waves from Two Neutron Star–Black Hole Coalescences, Astrophys. J. Lett. 915 (1) (2021) L5.arXiv:2106.15163,doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac082e

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[78]

R. P. Church, A. J. Levan, M. B. Davies, N. Tanvir, Implications for the origin of short gamma-ray bursts from their observed positions around their host galaxies, MNRAS413 (3) (2011) 2004–2014.arXiv:1101.1088, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18277.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[79]

B. O’Connor, E. Troja, S. Dichiara, P. Beniamini, S. B. Cenko, C. Kouveliotou, et al., A deep survey of short GRB host galaxies over z 0-2: implications for offsets, redshifts, and environments, MNRAS515 (4) (2022) 4890–4928. arXiv:2204.09059,doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1982

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[80]

Ž. Ivezi ´c, S. M. Kahn, J. A. Tyson, B. Abel, E. Acosta, R. Allsman, et al., LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products, ApJ873 (2) (2019) 111.arXiv:0805.2366,doi:10. 3847/1538-4357/ab042c

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019
[81]

R. Durgesh, P. J. Pessi, E. E. O. Ishida, J. Pelo- ton, Hostless extragalactic transients in Fink: Results from the ELEPHANT pipeline, arXiv e-prints (2026) arXiv:2605.22407arXiv:2605.22407,doi:10.48550/ arXiv.2605.22407

View on Pith Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.22407 2026
[82]

O. Y . Gnedin, H. M. Lee, J. P. Ostriker, Effects of Tidal Shocks on the Evolution of Globular Clusters, ApJ522 (2) (1999) 935–949.arXiv:astro-ph/9806245,doi:10. 1086/307659

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[83]

H. Brown, S. Kobayashi, E. M. Rossi, R. Sari, Tidal disruption of inclined or eccentric binaries by massive black holes, MNRAS477 (4) (2018) 5682–5691.arXiv: 1804.02911,doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1069

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[84]

F. Renaud, M. Gieles, C. M. Boily, Evolution of star clus- ters in arbitrary tidal fields, MNRAS418 (2) (2011) 759– 769.arXiv:1107.5820,doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966. 2011.19531.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[85]

P.-A. Duc, F. Renaud, Tides in Colliding Galaxies, in: J. Souchay, S. Mathis, T. Tokieda (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Physics, Berlin Springer Verlag, V ol. 861, 2013, p. 327. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32961-6_9

View on Pith doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32961-6_9 2013
[86]

B. F. Collins, R. Sari, Levy Flights of Binary Orbits due to Impulsive Encounters, Astron. J. 136 (2008) 2552.arXiv:0810.1525,doi:10.1088/0004-6256/ 136/6/2552

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008
[88]

Y .-C. Zhang, X.-H. Yang, Size distribution of galax- ies in sdss dr7: weak dependence on halo environment, Res. Astron. Astrophys. 19 (2019) 006.doi:10.1088/ 1674-4527/19/1/6. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1674-4527/19/1/ 6

View on Pith doi:10.1088/1674-4527/19/1/ 2019
[89]

B. P. Moster, R. S. Somerville, C. Maulbetsch, F. C. van den Bosch, A. V . Macciò, T. Naab, et al., Constraints on the Relationship between Stellar Mass and Halo Mass at Low and High Redshift, ApJ710 (2) (2010) 903– 923.arXiv:0903.4682,doi:10.1088/0004-637X/ 710/2/903

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[90]

B. Diemer, COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cosmol- ogy, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 239 (2) (2018) 35.doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaee8c

View on Pith doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaee8c 2018
[91]

T. Ishiyama, F. Prada, A. A. Klypin, et al, The uchuu sim- ulations: Data release 1 and dark matter halo concentra- tions, MNRAS 506 (2021) 4210–4231.doi:10.1093/ mnras/stab1755. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab1755

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1755 2021
[92]

S. Courteau, A. A. Dutton, F. C. van den Bosch, et al., Scaling relations of spiral galaxies, ApJ 671 (2007) 203Y225.doi:10.1086/522193. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/522193 21

View on Pith doi:10.1086/522193 2007

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [87]

B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, et al., GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspi- ral, PRL119 (16) (2017) 161101.arXiv:1710.05832, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[2] [1]

A. Goldstein, P. Veres, E. Burns, M. S. Briggs, R. Ham- burg, D. Kocevski, et al., An Ordinary Short Gamma- Ray Burst with Extraordinary Implications: Fermi- GBM Detection of GRB 170817A, ApJL848 (2) (2017) L14.arXiv:1710.05446,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ aa8f41

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[3] [3]

B. D. Metzger, G. Martínez-Pinedo, S. Darbha, E. Quataert, A. Arcones, D. Kasen, et al., Electromag- netic counterparts of compact object mergers powered by the radioactive decay of r-process nuclei, MNRAS406 (4) (2010) 2650–2662.arXiv:1001.5029,doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2010.16864.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[4] [4]

I. Bartos, P. Brady, S. Márka, How gravitational- wave observations can shape the gamma-ray burst paradigm, Classical and Quantum Gravity 30 (12) (2013) 123001.arXiv:1212.2289,doi:10.1088/ 0264-9381/30/12/123001

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[5] [5]

S. S. Kimura, K. Murase, P. Mészáros, K. Kiuchi, High-energy Neutrino Emission from Short Gamma-Ray Bursts: Prospects for Coincident Detection with Gravi- tational Waves, ApJL848 (1) (2017) L4.arXiv:1708. 07075,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8d14

View on Pith doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8d14 2017

[6] [6]

A. Janiuk, Nucleosynthesis of elements in gamma- ray burst engines, A&A 568 (A105) (2014) 7. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423822. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/ 201423822

View on Pith doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423822 2014

[7] [7]

D. Kasen, B. Metzger, J. Barnes, E. Quataert, E. Ramirez- Ruiz, Origin of the heavy elements in binary neutron- star mergers from a gravitational-wave event, Nature 551 (2017) 80–84.doi:10.1038/nature24453. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/nature24453 16 Figure C.11: Time evolution of the fractional variations of the orbital energy and angular-momentum magnitud...

View on Pith doi:10.1038/nature24453 2017

[8] [8]

M. W. Coughlin, T. Dietrich, B. Margalit, B. D. Metzger, Multimessenger bayesian parameter inference of a binary neutron star merger, MNRAS Lett. 489 (2019) L91–L96. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz133. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1093/mnrasl/slz133

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz133 2019

[9] [9]

T. Dietrich, M. W. Coughlin, P. T. H. Pang, M. Bulla, J. Heinzel, L. Issa, et al., Multimessenger constraints on the neutron-star equation of state and the hubble constant, Science 370 (6523) (2020) 1450–1453.doi:10.1126/ science.abb43. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb43

View on Pith doi:10.1126/science.abb43 2020

[10] [10]

M.-H. Chen, L.-X. Li, Q.-H. Chen, R.-C. Hu, E.- W. Liang, Neutron star mergers as the dominant contributor to the production of heavy r-process elements, MNRAS 529 (2) (2024) 1154–1160. arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/mnras/ article-pdf/529/2/1154/56916485/stae475.pdf, doi:10.1093/mnras/stae475. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stae475

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnras/stae475 2024

[11] [11]

B. F. Schutz, Determining the Hubble constant from grav- itational wave observations, Nature 323 (1986) 310.doi: 10.1038/323310a0

View on Pith doi:10.1038/323310a0 1986

[12] [12]

D. E. Holz, S. A. Hughes, Using gravitational-wave stan- dard sirens, ApJ 629 (2005) 15.doi:10.1086/431341. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/431341

View on Pith doi:10.1086/431341 2005

[13] [13]

N. Dalal, D. E. Holz, S. A. Hughes, B. Jain, Short grb and binary black hole standard sirens as a probe of dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 063006. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.063006. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevD.74.063006

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.063006 2006

[14] [14]

B. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, et al., A gravitational- wave standard siren measurement of the Hubble constant, Nature 551 (2017) 85–88.arXiv:1710.05835,doi:10. 1038/nature24471

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[15] [15]

J. C. Rastinejad, B. P. Gompertz, A. J. Levan, W.-f. Fong, M. Nicholl, G. P. Lamb, et al., A kilonova fol- lowing a long-duration gamma-ray burst at 350 Mpc, Na- ture612 (7939) (2022) 223–227.arXiv:2204.10864, doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05390-w

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[16] [16]

Y .-H. Yang, E. Troja, B. O’Connor, C. L. Fryer, M. Im, J. Durbak, et al., A lanthanide-rich kilonova in the af- termath of a long gamma-ray burst, Nature626 (8000) (2024) 742–745.arXiv:2308.00638,doi:10.1038/ s41586-023-06979-5

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[17] [17]

A. J. Levan, B. P. Gompertz, O. S. Salafia, M. Bulla, E. Burns, K. Hotokezaka, et al., Heavy-element produc- tion in a compact object merger observed by JWST, Na- ture626 (8000) (2024) 737–741.arXiv:2307.02098, doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06759-1

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[18] [18]

E. Berger, Short-Duration Gamma-Ray Bursts, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 52 (2014) 43– 105.arXiv:1311.2603,doi:10.1146/ annurev-astro-081913-035926

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[19] [19]

J. S. Bloom, J. X. Prochaska, D. Pooley, C. H. Blake, R. J. Foley, S. Jha, et al., Closing in on a Short-Hard Burst Progenitor: Constraints from Early-Time Optical Imaging and Spectroscopy of a Possible Host Galaxy of GRB 050509b, ApJ638 (1) (2006) 354–368.arXiv: astro-ph/0505480,doi:10.1086/498107

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[20] [20]

S. B. Cenko, D. B. Fox, B. E. Penprase, A. Cucchiara, P. A. Price, E. Berger, et al., GRB 070125: The First Long-Duration Gamma-Ray Burst in a Halo Environment, ApJ677 (1) (2008) 441–447.arXiv:0712.2828,doi: 10.1086/526491

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008

[21] [21]

W. Fong, E. Berger, The Locations of Short Gamma-Ray Bursts as Evidence for Compact Object Binary Progen- itors, ApJ776 (1) (2013) 18.arXiv:1307.0819,doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/18

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[22] [22]

W.-f. Fong, A. E. Nugent, Y . Dong, E. Berger, K. Pa- terson, R. Chornock, et al., Short GRB Host Galaxies. I. Photometric and Spectroscopic Catalogs, Host Asso- ciations, and Galactocentric Offsets, ApJ940 (1) (2022) 56.arXiv:2206.01763,doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ ac91d0

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[23] [23]

J. S. Bloom, D. A. Perley, H. W. Chen, N. Butler, J. X. Prochaska, D. Kocevski, et al., A Putative Early-Type Host Galaxy for GRB 060502B: Implications for the Pro- genitors of Short-Duration Hard-Spectrum Bursts, As- trophys. J. 654 (2007) 878–884.arXiv:astro-ph/ 0607223,doi:10.1086/509114

View on Pith doi:10.1086/509114 2007

[24] [24]

E. Troja, B. O’Connor, Y .-H. Yang, T. M. Gaudin, M. Ya- dav, N. Passaleva, et al., A possible high-redshift origin for the short GRB 061201: implications of a compact bi- nary merger beyond cosmic noon, arXiv e-prints (2026) arXiv:2607.01337arXiv:2607.01337,doi:10.48550/ arXiv.2607.01337

View on Pith Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.01337 2026

[25] [25]

V . Kalogera, Orbital characteristics of binary systems after asymmetric supernova explosions, Astrophys. J. 471 (1996) 352.arXiv:astro-ph/9605186,doi:10. 1086/177974

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[26] [26]

A. Wongwathanarat, H. T. Janka, E. Müller, Three- dimensional neutrino-driven supernovae: Neutron star kicks, spins, and asymmetric ejection of nucleosynthe- sis products, A&A552 (2013) A126.arXiv:1210.8148, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220636

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[27] [27]

T. M. Tauris, R. J. Takens, Runaway velocities of stellar components originating from disrupted binaries via asym- metric supernova explosions, A&A330 (1998) 1047– 1059. 18

View on Pith 1998

[28] [28]

T. M. Tauris, M. Kramer, P. C. C. Freire, N. Wex, H. T. Janka, N. Langer, et al., Formation of Double Neutron Star Systems, ApJ846 (2) (2017) 170.arXiv:1706. 09438,doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7e89

View on Pith doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7e89 2017

[29] [29]

V . Alfradique, R. da Mata, J. C. Rodríguez-Ramírez, C. R. Bom, Multi-wavelength analysis of the progenitor of GRB 230307A via Bayesian model comparison, arXiv e-prints (2025) arXiv:2510.14879arXiv:2510.14879,doi:10. 48550/arXiv.2510.14879

View on Pith doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.14879 2025

[30] [30]

C. R. Bom, D. C. Rodrigues, A. Cortesi, A. E. Araujo- Carvalho, D. Ruschel-Dutra, G. Iorio, et al., Probing the Origin of the Kilonova Candidate GRB 230307A: Anal- ysis of Host Galaxy and Offset, ApJL1001 (2) (2026) L37.arXiv:2512.09036,doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ ae4fbe

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[31] [31]

C.-A. Faucher-Giguere, A. Loeb, Pulsar-black hole bi- naries in the Galactic Centre, MNRAS415 (4) (2011) 3951–3961.arXiv:1012.0573,doi:10.1111/j. 1365-2966.2011.19019.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[32] [32]

M. A. Sedda, Dissecting the properties of neutron star - black hole mergers originating in dense star clusters, Commun. Phys. 3 (2020) 43.arXiv:2003.02279,doi: 10.1038/s42005-020-0310-x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[33] [33]

A. Generozov, N. C. Stone, B. D. Metzger, J. P. Os- triker, An overabundance of black hole X-ray binaries in the Galactic Centre from tidal captures, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 478 (3) (2018) 4030–4051.arXiv: 1804.01543,doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1262

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[34] [34]

N. Neumayer, A. Seth, T. Böker, Nuclear star clusters, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review 28 (1) (2020) 4.doi:10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0

View on Pith doi:10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0 2020

[35] [35]

N. Ivanova, C. O. Heinke, F. A. Rasio, K. Belczynski, J. M. Fregeau, Formation and evolution of compact bina- ries in globular clusters - II. Binaries with neutron stars, MNRAS386 (1) (2008) 553–576.arXiv:0706.4096, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13064.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008

[36] [36]

M. J. Benacquista, J. M. B. Downing, Relativistic Bina- ries in Globular Clusters, Living Reviews in Relativity 16 (1) (2013) 4.arXiv:1110.4423,doi:10.12942/ lrr-2013-4

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[37] [37]

F. M. Khan, M. Preto, P. Berczik, I. Berentzen, A. Just, R. Spurzem, Mergers of Unequal-mass Galaxies: Su- permassive Black Hole Binary Evolution and Structure of Merger Remnants, ApJ749 (2) (2012) 147.arXiv: 1202.2124,doi:10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/147

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[38] [38]

A. Gualandris, J. I. Read, W. Dehnen, E. Bortolas, Colli- sionless loss-cone refilling: there is no final parsec prob- lem, MNRAS464 (2) (2017) 2301–2310.arXiv:1609. 09383,doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2528

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2528 2017

[39] [39]

J. Goodman, Self-gravity and quasi-stellar object discs, MNRAS339 (4) (2003) 937–948.arXiv:astro-ph/ 0201001,doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06241. x

View on Pith doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06241 2003

[40] [40]

Y . Levin, Starbursts near supermassive black holes: young stars in the Galactic Centre, and gravitational waves in LISA band, MNRAS374 (2) (2007) 515– 524.arXiv:astro-ph/0603583,doi:10.1111/j. 1365-2966.2006.11155.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2007

[41] [41]

S. Collin, J.-P. Zahn, Star formation in accretion discs: from the Galactic center to active galactic nuclei, A&A477 (2) (2008) 419–435.arXiv:0709.3772,doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078191

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008

[42] [42]

A. Generozov, H. B. Perets, Capture of stars into gaseous discs around massive black holes: alignment, circular- ization, and growth, MNRAS522 (2) (2023) 1763–1778. arXiv:2212.11301,doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1016

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[43] [43]

B. McKernan, K. E. S. Ford, R. O’Shaughnessy, Black hole, neutron star, and white dwarf merger rates in AGN discs, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 498 (3) (2020) 4088–4094.arXiv:2002.00046,doi:10.1093/ mnras/staa2681

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[44] [44]

H. Tagawa, Z. Haiman, B. Kocsis, Formation and Evolution of Compact-object Binaries in AGN Disks, ApJ898 (1) (2020) 25.arXiv:1912.08218,doi:10. 3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[45] [45]

C. J. Conselice, C. Yang, A. F. L. Bluck, The struc- tures of distant galaxies - III. The merger history of over 20000 massive galaxies at z<1.2, MNRAS394 (4) (2009) 1956–1972.arXiv:0812.3237,doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2009.14396.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009

[46] [46]

G. Martin, R. A. Jackson, S. Kaviraj, H. Choi, J. E. G. Devriendt, Y . Dubois, et al., The role of mergers and in- teractions in driving the evolution of dwarf galaxies over cosmic time, MNRAS500 (4) (2021) 4937–4957.arXiv: 2007.07913,doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3443

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[47] [47]

F. M. Khan, D. Fiacconi, L. Mayer, P. Berczik, A. Just, Swift Coalescence of Supermassive Black Holes in Cosmological Mergers of Massive Galaxies, ApJ828 (2) (2016) 73.arXiv:1604.00015,doi:10. 3847/0004-637X/828/2/73

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[48] [48]

D. Merritt, Mass deficits, stalling radii, and the merger histories of elliptical galaxies, The Astrophysical Journal 648 (2) (2006) 976–986.arXiv:astro-ph/0603439, doi:10.1086/506139

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[49] [49]

S. P. Rusli, P. Erwin, R. P. Saglia, J. Thomas, M. Fabri- cius, R. Bender, et al., Depleted galaxy cores and dy- namical black hole masses, The Astronomical Journal 146 (6) (2013) 160.arXiv:1310.5310,doi:10.1088/ 0004-6256/146/6/160. 19

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[50] [50]

A. Merritt, P. van Dokkum, R. Abraham, J. Zhang, The dragonfly nearby galaxies survey. i. substantial variation in the diffuse stellar halos around spiral galaxies, The Astrophysical Journal 830 (2) (2016) 62.arXiv:1606. 08847,doi:10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/62

View on Pith doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/62 2016

[51] [51]

C. Gilhuly, A. Merritt, R. Abraham, S. Danieli, D. Lokhorst, Q. Liu, et al., Stellar halos from the drag- onfly edge-on galaxies survey, The Astrophysical Journal 932 (1) (2022) 44.arXiv:2204.06596,doi:10.3847/ 1538-4357/ac6750

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[52] [52]

X. Siemens, J. Ellis, F. Jenet, J. D. Romano, The stochastic background: scaling laws and time to de- tection for pulsar timing arrays, Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 224015.arXiv:1305.3196,doi:10.1088/ 0264-9381/30/22/224015

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[53] [53]

S. Chen, A. Sesana, C. J. Conselice, Constraining astro- physical observables of galaxy and supermassive black hole binary mergers using pulsar timing arrays, MN- RAS488 (1) (2019) 401–418.arXiv:1810.04184,doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1722

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019

[54] [54]

P. A. Seoane, et al., Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, Living Rev. Rel. 26 (1) (2023) 2.arXiv:2203.06016, doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[55] [55]

G. Agazie, A. Anumarlapudi, A. M. Archibald, P. T. Baker, B. Bécsy, L. Blecha, et al., The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Constraints on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries from the Gravitational-wave Background, ApJL952 (2) (2023) L37.arXiv:2306.16220,doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace18b

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[56] [56]

A. W. Graham, C. A. Onken, E. Athanassoula, F. Combes, An expanded M bh-σdiagram, and a new calibra- tion of active galactic nuclei masses, MNRAS412 (4) (2011) 2211–2228.arXiv:1007.3834,doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2010.18045.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[57] [57]

C. D. Murray, S. F. Dermott, Solar System Dynam- ics, Cambridge University Press, 1999.doi:10.1017/ CBO9781139174817

View on Pith 1999

[58] [58]

A. Fetter, J. Walecka, Theoretical Mechanics of Particles and Continua, Dover Books on Physics, Dover Publica- tions, 2003. URLhttps://books.google.com.br/books?id= olMpStYOlnoC

View on Pith 2003

[59] [59]

M. A. Minovitch, A method for determining interplane- tary free-fall reconnaissance trajectories, Tech. Rep. JPL Technical Report 32-464, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Cal- ifornia Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA, un- published technical report (1961)

View on Pith 1961

[60] [60]

G. A. Flandro, Fast reconnaissance missions to the outer solar system utilizing energy derived from the gravita- tional field of jupiter, Astronautica Acta 12 (4) (1966) 329–337

View on Pith 1966

[61] [61]

A. Sesana, F. Haardt, P. Madau, Interaction of Mas- sive Black Hole Binaries with Their Stellar Environment. I. Ejection of Hypervelocity Stars, ApJ651 (1) (2006) 392–400.arXiv:astro-ph/0604299,doi:10.1086/ 507596

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[62] [62]

J. Binney, S. Tremaine, Galactic Dynamics, 2nd Edition, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008

View on Pith 2008

[63] [63]

P. C. Peters, Gravitational radiation and the motion of two point masses, Phys. Rev. 136 (1964) B1224–B1232. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.136.B1224. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRev.136.B1224

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrev.136.b1224 1964

[64] [64]

L. Zwick, P. R. Capelo, E. Bortolas, L. Mayer, P. Amaro- Seoane, Improved gravitational radiation time-scales: significance for LISA and LIGO-Virgo sources, MN- RAS495 (2) (2020) 2321–2331.arXiv:1911.06024, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[65] [65]

J. Kormendy, L. C. Ho, Coevolution (Or Not) of Super- massive Black Holes and Host Galaxies, ARAA51 (1) (2013) 511–653.arXiv:1304.7762,doi:10.1146/ annurev-astro-082708-101811

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[66] [66]

L. Hernquist, An analytical model for spherical galaxies and bulges, ApJ 356 (1990) 359–364.doi:10.1086/ 168845. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/168845

View on Pith doi:10.1086/168845 1990

[67] [67]

M. Miyamoto, R. Nagai, Three-dimensional models for the distribution of mass in galaxies, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 27 (4) (1975) 533–543. doi:10.1093/pasj/27.4.533

View on Pith doi:10.1093/pasj/27.4.533 1975

[68] [68]

J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk, S. D. M. White, The structure of cold dark matter halos, ApJ 462 (1996) 563–575.doi: 10.1086/177173. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/177173

View on Pith doi:10.1086/177173 1996

[69] [69]

G. Girelli, L. Pozzetti, M. Bolzonella, C. Giocoli, F. Marulli, M. Baldi, The stellar-to-halo mass rela- tion over the past 12 Gyr. I. StandardΛCDM model, A&A634 (2020) A135.arXiv:2001.02230,doi:10. 1051/0004-6361/201936329

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[70] [70]

P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, et al., SciPy 1.0: fun- damental algorithms for scientific computing in Python, Nature Methods 17 (2020) 261–272.doi:10.1038/ s41592-019-0686-2

View on Pith 2020

[71] [71]

K. Stovall, et al., PALFA Discovery of a Highly Rela- tivistic Double Neutron Star Binary, Astrophys. J. Lett. 854 (2) (2018) L22.arXiv:1802.01707,doi:10. 3847/2041-8213/aaad06

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[72] [72]

F. Özel, P. Freire, Masses, Radii, and the Equation of State of Neutron Stars, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 54 (2016) 401–440.arXiv:1603.02698,doi:10.1146/ annurev-astro-081915-023322. 20

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[73] [73]

J. Alsing, H. O. Silva, E. Berti, Evidence for a maximum mass cut-offin the neutron star mass distribution and con- straints on the equation of state, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 478 (1) (2018) 1377–1391.arXiv:1709.07889, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1065

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[74] [74]

P.-E. Tremblay, J. Cummings, J. S. Kalirai, B. T. Gän- sicke, N. Gentile-Fusillo, R. Raddi, The field white dwarf mass distribution, MNRAS461 (2) (2016) 2100–2114. arXiv:1606.05292,doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1447

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[75] [75]

S. Toonen, H. B. Perets, A. P. Igoshev, E. Michaely, Y . Zenati, The demographics of neutron star – white dwarf mergers - Rates, delay-time distributions, and progeni- tors, Astron. Astrophys. 619 (2018) A53.arXiv:1804. 01538,doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833164

View on Pith doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833164 2018

[76] [76]

W. M. Farr, N. Sravan, A. Cantrell, L. Kreidberg, C. D. Bailyn, I. Mandel, et al., The Mass Distribution of Stellar- mass Black Holes, ApJ741 (2) (2011) 103.arXiv:1011. 1459,doi:10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/103

View on Pith doi:10.1088/0004-637x/741/2/103 2011

[77] [77]

R. Abbott, et al., Observation of Gravitational Waves from Two Neutron Star–Black Hole Coalescences, Astrophys. J. Lett. 915 (1) (2021) L5.arXiv:2106.15163,doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac082e

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[78] [78]

R. P. Church, A. J. Levan, M. B. Davies, N. Tanvir, Implications for the origin of short gamma-ray bursts from their observed positions around their host galaxies, MNRAS413 (3) (2011) 2004–2014.arXiv:1101.1088, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18277.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[79] [79]

B. O’Connor, E. Troja, S. Dichiara, P. Beniamini, S. B. Cenko, C. Kouveliotou, et al., A deep survey of short GRB host galaxies over z 0-2: implications for offsets, redshifts, and environments, MNRAS515 (4) (2022) 4890–4928. arXiv:2204.09059,doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1982

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[80] [80]

Ž. Ivezi ´c, S. M. Kahn, J. A. Tyson, B. Abel, E. Acosta, R. Allsman, et al., LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products, ApJ873 (2) (2019) 111.arXiv:0805.2366,doi:10. 3847/1538-4357/ab042c

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019

[81] [81]

R. Durgesh, P. J. Pessi, E. E. O. Ishida, J. Pelo- ton, Hostless extragalactic transients in Fink: Results from the ELEPHANT pipeline, arXiv e-prints (2026) arXiv:2605.22407arXiv:2605.22407,doi:10.48550/ arXiv.2605.22407

View on Pith Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.22407 2026

[82] [82]

O. Y . Gnedin, H. M. Lee, J. P. Ostriker, Effects of Tidal Shocks on the Evolution of Globular Clusters, ApJ522 (2) (1999) 935–949.arXiv:astro-ph/9806245,doi:10. 1086/307659

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[83] [83]

H. Brown, S. Kobayashi, E. M. Rossi, R. Sari, Tidal disruption of inclined or eccentric binaries by massive black holes, MNRAS477 (4) (2018) 5682–5691.arXiv: 1804.02911,doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1069

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[84] [84]

F. Renaud, M. Gieles, C. M. Boily, Evolution of star clus- ters in arbitrary tidal fields, MNRAS418 (2) (2011) 759– 769.arXiv:1107.5820,doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966. 2011.19531.x

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[85] [85]

P.-A. Duc, F. Renaud, Tides in Colliding Galaxies, in: J. Souchay, S. Mathis, T. Tokieda (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Physics, Berlin Springer Verlag, V ol. 861, 2013, p. 327. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32961-6_9

View on Pith doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32961-6_9 2013

[86] [86]

B. F. Collins, R. Sari, Levy Flights of Binary Orbits due to Impulsive Encounters, Astron. J. 136 (2008) 2552.arXiv:0810.1525,doi:10.1088/0004-6256/ 136/6/2552

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008

[87] [88]

Y .-C. Zhang, X.-H. Yang, Size distribution of galax- ies in sdss dr7: weak dependence on halo environment, Res. Astron. Astrophys. 19 (2019) 006.doi:10.1088/ 1674-4527/19/1/6. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1674-4527/19/1/ 6

View on Pith doi:10.1088/1674-4527/19/1/ 2019

[88] [89]

B. P. Moster, R. S. Somerville, C. Maulbetsch, F. C. van den Bosch, A. V . Macciò, T. Naab, et al., Constraints on the Relationship between Stellar Mass and Halo Mass at Low and High Redshift, ApJ710 (2) (2010) 903– 923.arXiv:0903.4682,doi:10.1088/0004-637X/ 710/2/903

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[89] [90]

B. Diemer, COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cosmol- ogy, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 239 (2) (2018) 35.doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaee8c

View on Pith doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaee8c 2018

[90] [91]

T. Ishiyama, F. Prada, A. A. Klypin, et al, The uchuu sim- ulations: Data release 1 and dark matter halo concentra- tions, MNRAS 506 (2021) 4210–4231.doi:10.1093/ mnras/stab1755. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab1755

View on Pith doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1755 2021

[91] [92]

S. Courteau, A. A. Dutton, F. C. van den Bosch, et al., Scaling relations of spiral galaxies, ApJ 671 (2007) 203Y225.doi:10.1086/522193. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1086/522193 21

View on Pith doi:10.1086/522193 2007