Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Using gravitational waves and multi-messenger Astronomy to reverse-engineer the properties of galactic nuclei

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that gravitational-wave detections of binary black hole mergers can be used to reverse-engineer the properties of active galactic nuclei and the star clusters that host them, and it makes a new quantitative prediction for…

desk verdict A useful expert review of the AGN channel whose genuinely new redshift-scaling claim is a heuristic illustration that needs parameter ranges, not a robust prediction. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08801 v1 pith:CX72W5KR submitted 2025-06-10 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA

K.E. Saavik Ford , Barry McKernan This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.GA
keywords gravitationalwavesbinaryblackholemergersAGNaccretiondisksnuclearstarclustershierarchicaleffectivespinmass-gapholesmulti-messengerastronomy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that mergers of stellar-mass black holes inside the gaseous disks of active galactic nuclei (AGN) can serve as a reverse-engineering probe of galactic nuclei that are too small for telescopes to resolve. Its new quantitative claim is that the AGN-driven binary black hole (BBH) merger rate should follow the AGN number density as a function of redshift, slightly softened by the growth of the nuclear star cluster (NSC), so the rate rises toward redshift $z\sim 2$ and turns over where AGN activity peaks. If true, current and future gravitational-wave detectors can measure the fraction of mergers coming from this channel, and whatever value that fraction takes will constrain the average lifetime, density, and size of AGN disks as well as the black hole population in NSCs. The paper also identifies specific observable signatures, including echo peaks of the $\sim 35\,M_\odot$ feature in the mass spectrum, high spins in the upper mass gap, and the effective spin distribution, that would single out the AGN channel.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the AGN disk as a dynamical bottleneck: gas torques cause embedded compact objects to migrate, binaries form and harden in the disk, and the deep gravitational potential retains merger products despite kicks, allowing hierarchical mergers. The redshift prediction is carried by the functional form $R_{\rm AGN}(z) \propto n_{\rm AGN}(z; L_X) \times M_{\rm NSC}(z)$, with $n_{\rm AGN}$ taken from Ueda et al. (2014) and a linear NSC growth factor of ten since $z=2$. The observable discriminants are the mass-spin features, including $\sim 35\,M_\odot$ peak echoes, upper-mass-gap black holes with $|a|>0.9$, the $\chi_{\rm eff}$ distribution and its anti-correlation with mass ratio, and the in-plane spin component $\chi_p$ from spheroid encounters.

What would settle it

A direct test is to compare the measured BBH merger rate out to $z\sim 2\!-\!3$ with the AGN number density curve, for example $L_X=10^{44}$ erg/s with $\gamma\approx 4.8$ to $z\approx 1.85$, times the assumed NSC growth. If the measured turnover redshift differs measurably from the AGN density turnover, or if the slope is as steep as the raw AGN density with no NSC softening, the paper's scaling is wrong. A second falsifier: the indirect association method of Veronesi et al. (2025) already constrains bright AGN to contribute less than about 21 (11) percent; if the O4 catalog confirms a small $f_{\rm BBH,AGN}$ while the rate of upper-mass-gap events stays high, the AGN channel's predicted IMBH production would be in tension.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the redshift history of AGN-driven black hole mergers is essentially a recasting of the cosmic history of AGN activity. The merger rate should scale as the AGN number density, with a power-law index set by X-ray luminosity (roughly $(1+z)^\gamma$ with $\gamma\approx 4\!-\!5.6$ out to $z\approx 1.85$), multiplied by the growth of the nuclear star cluster's black hole population, which the authors model as a linear factor of ten from $z=2$ to $z=0$ following Antonini et al. (2015). Thus the rate is predicted to rise sharply from $z=0$, peak near $z\sim 1.8\!-\!2$, and decline at higher redshift. The paper also argues that the $\sim 35\,M_\odot$ mass feature and its multiples test the depth of the potential well and merger-product retention, that very high effective spins in the upper mass gap can only arise from gas accretion, and that a measurement of $f_{\rm BBH,AGN}$, regardless of its value, would infer the average AGN disk lifetime, density, size, and NSC mass segregation.

Load-bearing premise

The redshift prediction assumes the AGN-driven merger rate is simply proportional to AGN number density times a nuclear star cluster black hole population that grew linearly by a factor of ten since $z=2$; if the rate actually depends on disk accretion rate, disk lifetime, or migration-trap efficiency, or if NSC growth is slower, the predicted slope and turnover redshift change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The AGN-driven BBH merger rate should rise roughly as $(1+z)^\gamma$ from $z=0$ toward $z\sim 2$, then turn over near the redshift where the AGN number density peaks, slightly softened by NSC growth.
  • Echo peaks at multiples of the $\sim 35\,M_\odot$ feature, such as $70\,M_\odot+70\,M_\odot$, would indicate a deep potential well retaining merger products, pointing to AGN; a lone $70\,M_\odot$ peak with no higher echoes would favor a shallower channel.
  • Very high spins ($a>0.9$) among upper-mass-gap black holes, plus non-isotropic $\chi_{\rm eff}$ for hierarchical mergers, are signatures that only gas accretion in AGN disks can produce.
  • Measuring $f_{\rm BBH,AGN}$, whatever its value, would constrain the average AGN disk lifetime, density, and size and the NSC black hole population out to the detector horizon.
  • Future detectors sensitive to all mergers out to $z\sim 20$ would map $f_{\rm AGN}(z)$ and thereby trace how AGN, NSCs, and supermassive black holes co-evolve.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Implicit in the scaling is a testable hinge: comparing the measured turnover redshift of the merger rate with independently measured AGN density would isolate whether disk lifetime or migration-trap efficiency, rather than gas supply, controls the AGN channel rate.
  • The echo-peak argument could be inverted to infer the NSC black hole initial mass function from the relative heights of the $35+35$, $35+70$, and $70+70$ peaks, without resolving the nuclei.
  • If the O4 catalog confirms a small $f_{\rm BBH,AGN}$ while upper-mass-gap events remain common, the AGN channel's predicted IMBH formation efficiency would be in tension, motivating alternative hierarchical environments.
  • The predicted merger rate slope could in principle be used to measure NSC growth from gravitational-wave data alone, treating $M_{\rm NSC}(z)$ as a free parameter rather than adopting the linear factor-of-ten model.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. Ford and McKernan review the AGN-disk channel for stellar-mass BBH mergers and argue that current and near-future gravitational-wave observations can be used to reverse-engineer the properties of AGN disks and nuclear star clusters (NSCs). The paper surveys the expected GW signatures (mass-gap and IMBH production, mass-ratio and spin distributions, mass-spin correlations, and hierarchical echo peaks of the ~35 M_sun feature) and EM counterparts. It introduces a new heuristic prediction in §5.4 that the AGN-driven BBH merger rate as a function of redshift should track the AGN number density multiplied by the NSC black-hole population, rising slightly less steeply than the AGN density and turning over near z~2. The authors also argue that measuring the AGN fraction f_BBH,AGN of observed mergers, whatever its value, would constrain average AGN disk and NSC properties. The paper relies heavily on the authors' McFACTS population-synthesis code, which is open source and publicly available.

Significance. If the predictions hold, the AGN channel offers several concrete, falsifiable discriminators: hierarchical merger echo peaks at multiples of the 35 M_sun feature, high spin (a>0.9) in the upper mass gap, large in-plane spin components from disk-ejection encounters, and a redshift turnover in the AGN-driven rate near the AGN density peak. The review is broad and well referenced, and the public availability of McFACTS and the reproducibility of Figs. 1-4, 8, and 10 are genuine strengths. The most novel element, the §5.4 redshift-scaling prediction, is not a derived relation: it rests on an assumed proportionality and a hand-chosen NSC growth factor, and its 'slightly shallower than AGN density' slope is sensitive to that choice. The turnover redshift and the general idea that NSC growth softens the AGN density slope are more robust than the quantitative slope.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5.4, Fig. 11] The redshift-scaling claim in the abstract and §5.4 is not supported as stated. The rate R(z) ∝ n_AGN(L_x,z) × N_NSC(z) is assumed rather than derived; the per-AGN merger rate in the channel depends on disk surface density, disk lifetime, and migration trap/swamp efficiency (§4, §7.3.1), all of which plausibly evolve with redshift. The linear NSC growth factor of 10 since z=2 is at the upper end of the range implied by §3.2, where NSCs are said to have accumulated O(10–50%) of their mass by z~2; if the growth factor is 2, the L_x=10^44 erg/s curve in Fig. 11 rises as ~(1+z)^4.1 over z=0–1, which is inconsistent with the LVK rate evolution ∝(1+z)^2.9 quoted in the same figure. The statement that the prediction is 'certainly consistent' with current observations is therefore a post-hoc choice within a degenerate (L_x, NSC growth) family, and only the turnover redshift, set by the AGN density peak, is robust. The authors should either derive the proportionality from a physical model or explicitly present the scaling as an illustrative heuristic, with the sensitivity to the NSC growth factor quantified.
  2. [§5.1.3, Fig. 1] The treatment of the ~35 M_sun feature as a probe of hierarchical mergers is partly circular. The McFACTS simulation in Fig. 1 is initialized with a Gaussian pile-up centered at 35 M_sun in the BH initial mass function, and the paper then uses the observed ~35 M_sun excess in the GW mass spectrum as evidence that hierarchical echoes (e.g., at ~70 M_sun and ~140 M_sun) should be observable. The echo prediction is thereby conditional on the very input feature that the simulation assumes; the paper should state explicitly that Fig. 1 does not predict the 35 M_sun peak but rather explores its consequences, and that the falsifiable content lies in the relative strengths of the echo peaks. The alternative origins discussed in §7.3.2 (globular-cluster infall versus in-situ stellar evolution in AGN disks) should be mentioned before the 'excellent probe' claim in §5.1.3, so that the conditional nature of the argument is clear.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and §1] The abstract contains a duplicated article in 'in the the centers'; the keyword list (Classical Novae, Ultraviolet astronomy, History of astronomy, Interdisciplinary astronomy) appears to be copied from another submission and should be replaced with relevant keywords.
  2. [§5.1.1] The text contains an unresolved placeholder '3 link here?' immediately after the first mention of McFACTS; the public repository link should be inserted or the placeholder removed.
  3. [Eq. (7)] The binary hardness criterion is typeset ambiguously as 'GM1M2 2ab > 1 2 m3σ2'; the binding energy should be written with the correct factor of two in the denominator (G M1 M2 / (2 a_b) > (1/2) m_3 σ^2).
  4. [§5.1.3] The phrase 'multiples of the 35 M_sun peak should be observed (such as at 70 M_sun + 70 M_sun)' is confusing because 70+70 is a merger product at ~140 M_sun, not a multiple of the 35 M_sun peak; please clarify whether the prediction is for peaks at 70, 105, 140 M_sun or for a 140 M_sun remnant.
  5. [§7.4] The future ground-based observatory is referred to as 'Einstein Observatory'; the standard name is the Einstein Telescope, and the cited reference Abac et al. 2025 is the Einstein Telescope collaboration.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's predictions are conditional model outputs with open-source, reproducible simulations and explicitly acknowledged scaling assumptions.

full rationale

The paper's central 'new result' in §5.4 is an explicit scaling assumption, not a derivation: the AGN-driven BBH merger rate is taken to follow the AGN number density modified by an assumed NSC growth factor, with the factor of 10 chosen from an external cited range (Antonini et al. 2015) and the paper openly noting that slower NSC growth would still be consistent if lower-luminosity AGN dominate. This is a parameterized heuristic, not a quantity fitted to the target observation and renamed as a prediction. The 35 Msun 'echo' predictions in §5.1.3 are conditional on an observed/assumed feature in the BH IMF, and the McFACTS simulation in Fig. 1 explicitly states that the Gaussian pile-up at 35 Msun is an input; the paper does not claim to derive the 35 Msun feature from first principles. The code is stated to be open-source and publicly reproducible, so self-citations to McFACTS and related prior work are independently checkable rather than load-bearing circular support. No step in the derivation chain reduces to its own inputs by construction or relies on an unverified self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on a small number of empirical inputs and scaling assumptions. No new particles or forces are introduced. The main free parameters are the NSC growth factor and the initial BH IMF shape used in the illustrative simulation.

free parameters (3)
  • NSC black hole population growth factor since z=2 = 10 (linear growth)
    Chosen by hand to make the predicted AGN-driven merger rate consistent with the observed BBH rate; see §5.4 and Fig. 11.
  • Initial BH mass function Gaussian pile-up at 35 M_sun = Gaussian excess at 35 M_sun on a M^-1 powerlaw between 10 and 40 M_sun
    Input to the McFACTS simulation in Fig. 1, used to illustrate hierarchical echo peaks. Not fitted to data but chosen ad hoc.
  • Initial binary fraction f_bin,0 in low-density disk simulation = 0
    Set to zero in the Fig. 4 model and acknowledged as an important driver of the merger rate; see §5.1.1.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption AGN number density evolution follows Ueda et al. (2014) power laws with a cutoff at z~1.85
    Used to construct Fig. 11; the luminosity-dependent density is an empirical input.
  • domain assumption NSC BH population grows linearly by a factor of 10 from z=2 to z=0
    Adopted from Antonini et al. (2015); if this growth is wrong, the predicted slope changes.
  • ad hoc to paper BBH merger rate in AGN is proportional to AGN number density times NSC BH population
    Core scaling assumption for the new redshift prediction in §5.4; not derived from microphysics in this paper.
  • domain assumption Migration torques and gas hardening drive embedded BH to merge within AGN disk lifetime
    Standard AGN channel assumption cited to many prior works; underpins all predictions in the review.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Using gravitational waves and multi-messenger Astronomy to reverse-engineer the properties of galactic nuclei." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CX72W5KR

@misc{pith2026250608801,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Using gravitational waves and multi-messenger Astronomy to reverse-engineer the properties of galactic nuclei},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CX72W5KR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08801}
}
abstract

Active galactic nuclei (AGN) are powered by accretion disks onto supermassive black holes in the the centers of galaxies. AGN are believed to play important roles in the evolution of both supermassive black holes and their host galaxies over cosmic time. AGN and the nuclear star clusters (NSCs) that interact with them remain unresolved with present and planned telescopes. As a result, the properties of AGN and NSCs are highly uncertain. Here we review how binary black hole (BBH) mergers can occur in AGN disks and how both the gravitational wave (GW) and electromagnetic wave (EM) properties of such mergers allow us to reverse-engineer the properties of AGN disks and NSCs over cosmic time. We point out that the feature in the BBH mass spectrum around $\sim 35M_{\odot}$ is an excellent probe of hierarchical merger models. Likewise constraints on the spins of upper-mass gap BH ($\gtrsim 50M_{\odot}$) test the AGN channel. The effective spin ($\chi_{\rm eff}$) distribution, including asymmetry, islands of structure and magnitudes are excellent tests of AGN model predictions. We also argue, that the rate of AGN-driven BBH mergers as a function of redshift should scale slightly shallower than the AGN number density, at least out to redshifts of $\sim 2$, and should turnover at the same redshift as the AGN number density. Finally, we emphasize a determination of an AGN fraction of observed BBH mergers ($f_{\rm BBH,AGN}$), \emph{regardless of the actual value}, allows us to infer the average properties of AGN disks and NSCs out to high redshift.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08801 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. From McKernan et al. (2024). Number of BBH mergers per generation of BH as a function of merged mass (M⊙) for a BH initial mass function (IMF) of M−1 spanning MBH = [10, 40] M⊙ and simple Gaussian pile-up centered on 35 M⊙ for a 0.5Myr, Sirko & Goodman (2003) disk model around a MSMBH = 108 M⊙. Gold denotes 1g-1g merg￾ers, purple denotes 2g-mg (m ≤ 2)and red denotes 3g-ng (n ≤ 3) and higher, where 1g is first genera… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Kick velocity associated with each BBH merger as a function of disk radius and generation for the BBH mergers in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Mass and generation of BH merger as a function of disk radius for the BBH mergers in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: As Fig: 3 except using the lower density Thomp￾son et al. (2005) disk model run for 3Myr. disk, a relatively high rate of high mass ratio mergers is also to be expected around migration traps in AGN disks (Bellovary et al. 2016; Secunda et al. 2019; Yang et al. 2019b; …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: From McKernan & Ford (2023). Cartoon illus￾trating prograde and retrograde accretion onto BH embed￾ded in an AGN. Top panel shows a gas minidisk (with pro￾grade orbital angular momentum Ldisk) accreting onto a BH. Blue vector labelled a corresponds to an initial BH spi…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: From McKernan & Ford (2023). Cartoon of accretion onto a BH embedded in an AGN disk on a circularized orbit (left hand panel) and an eccentric orbit (right hand panel). White arrow indicates AGN gas flow direction and direction of orbit of the embedded BH. Yellow arrow…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: χp for the BBH mergers in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: From McKernan et al. (2022a), cartoon showing prograde and retrograde binary black holes (BBH) embed￾ded in an AGN disk. Also illustrated are other (single) BH embedded in the disk and BH on disk-crossing orbits. There are several reasons to expect the fraction of retr…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Variation of factors affecting BBH merger rate with redshift. Top panel: we show the number density of AGN (arbitrary normalization) as a function of redshift for AGN at 3 X-ray luminosities: Lx = 1043 , 1044 , 1045 ergs s−1 in black dotted, dashed, and solid lines, r…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Adapted from Cabrera et al. (2024), multi-panel schematic showing a representation of the mechanism believed to underpin luminous EM counterparts to BBH mergers in AGN disks. In panel 1, the pre-merger BBH accretes from mini-disks within its Hill sphere in the AGN dis…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Active Galactic Nucleus Tori: Potential Birthplace to Millions of Planets

    astro-ph.EP 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Streaming instability in magnetized AGN dust tori can yield tens of millions of planetary-mass objects per AGN, some formed directly above the hydrogen-burning limit.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

185 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.12263, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.12263

    Abac, A., Abramo, R., Albanesi, S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.12263, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.12263

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.12263 2025

  2. [2]

    P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 218, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abdcb7

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abdcb7 2021

  3. [3]

    D., Abraham, S., et al

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abraham, S., et al. 2020, ApJL, 896, L44, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab960f

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab960f 2020

  4. [4]

    C., & Bloch, A

    Adams, F. C., & Bloch, A. M. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1381, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/701/2/1381

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/701/2/1381 2009

  5. [5]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.19881, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.19881

    Akiba, T., Naoz, S., & Madigan, A.-M. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.19881, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.19881

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.19881 2024

  6. [6]

    R., Freitag, M., et al

    Amaro-Seoane, P., Gair, J. R., Freitag, M., et al. 2007, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 24, R113, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/24/17/R01

    doi:10.1088/0264-9381/24/17/r01 2007

  7. [7]

    2023, Living Reviews in Relativity, 26, 2, doi: 10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y

    Amaro-Seoane, P., Andrews, J., Arca Sedda, M., et al. 2023, Living Reviews in Relativity, 26, 2, doi: 10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y

    doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y 2023

  8. [8]

    2015, ApJ, 812, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/72

    Antonini, F., Barausse, E., & Silk, J. 2015, ApJ, 812, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/72

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/812/1/72 2015

Show all 185 references
  1. [9]

    2012, ApJ, 750, 111, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/111

    Antonini, F., Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R., Mastrobuono-Battisti, A., & Merritt, D. 2012, ApJ, 750, 111, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/111

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    2014, MNRAS, 444, 3738, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1683 Arca Sedda, M., Naoz, S., & Kocsis, B

    Arca-Sedda, M., & Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 3738, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1683 Arca Sedda, M., Naoz, S., & Kocsis, B. 2023, Universe, 9, 138, doi: 10.3390/universe9030138

    2014 doi

  3. [11]

    Artymowicz, P., Lin, D. N. C., & Wampler, E. J. 1993, ApJ, 409, 592, doi: 10.1086/172690 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. ...

    1993 doi

  4. [12]

    N., & Wolf, R

    Bahcall, J. N., & Wolf, R. A. 1976, ApJ, 209, 214, doi: 10.1086/154711

    1976 doi

  5. [13]

    2015, in Journal of Physics Conference Series, Vol

    Barausse, E., Cardoso, V., & Pani, P. 2015, in Journal of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 610, Journal of Physics Conference Series (IOP), 012044, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/610/1/012044 22

    2015 doi

  6. [14]

    M., & Petterson, J

    Bardeen, J. M., & Petterson, J. A. 1975, ApJL, 195, L65, doi: 10.1086/181711

    1975 doi

  7. [15]

    2010, ApJ, 708, 834, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/1/834

    Bartko, H., Martins, F., Trippe, S., et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, 834, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/1/834

    2010 doi

  8. [16]

    2017a, Nature Communications, 8, 831, doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-00851-7

    Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., Marka, Z., et al. 2017a, Nature Communications, 8, 831, doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-00851-7

    doi

  9. [17]

    2017b, ApJ, 835, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/165

    Bartos, I., Kocsis, B., Haiman, Z., & M´ arka, S. 2017b, ApJ, 835, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/165

    doi

  10. [18]

    Baruteau, C., Cuadra, J., & Lin, D. N. C. 2011, ApJ, 726, 28, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/726/1/28

    2011 doi

  11. [19]

    M., Mac Low, M.-M., McKernan, B., & Ford, K

    Bellovary, J. M., Mac Low, M.-M., McKernan, B., & Ford, K. E. S. 2016, ApJL, 819, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/L17

    2016 doi

  12. [20]

    2008, ApJ, 684, 822, doi: 10.1086/590379

    Berti, E., & Volonteri, M. 2008, ApJ, 684, 822, doi: 10.1086/590379

    2008 doi

  13. [21]

    1987, Galactic dynamics

    Binney, J., & Tremaine, S. 1987, Galactic dynamics

    1987

  14. [22]

    2010, A&A, 523, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014414

    Bitsch, B., & Kley, W. 2010, A&A, 523, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014414

    2010 doi

  15. [23]

    2024, ApJ, 973, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad67ca

    Byrne, L., Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., Wellons, S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad67ca

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.10698, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.10698

    Cabrera, T., Palmese, A., Hu, L., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.10698, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.10698

    2024 doi arXiv

  17. [25]

    M., Dittmann, A

    Calcino, J., Dempsey, A. M., Dittmann, A. J., & Li, H. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.13727, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2311.13727

    2023 doi arXiv

  18. [26]

    Farr, W. M. 2021, ApJL, 922, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2ccc

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    O., Zlochower, Y., & Merritt, D

    Campanelli, M., Lousto, C. O., Zlochower, Y., & Merritt, D. 2007, PhRvL, 98, 231102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.231102

    2007 doi

  20. [28]

    S., & Lin, D

    Cantiello, M., Jermyn, A. S., & Lin, D. N. C. 2021, ApJ, 910, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abdf4f

    2021 doi

  21. [29]

    2005, MNRAS, 356, 899, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08433.x

    Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R., & Vicari, A. 2005, MNRAS, 356, 899, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08433.x

    2005

  22. [30]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.16390, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.16390

    Chen, K., & Dai, Z.-G. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.16390, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.16390

    2025 doi arXiv

  23. [31]

    2019, MNRAS, 485, L141, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz046

    Chen, X., Li, S., & Cao, Z. 2019, MNRAS, 485, L141, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz046

    2019 doi

  24. [32]

    2022, ApJL, 939, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9b3e

    Chen, Y.-X., Bailey, A., Stone, J., & Zhu, Z. 2022, ApJL, 939, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9b3e

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.13951, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.13951

    Chen, Y.-X., Jiang, Y.-F., & Goodman, J. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.13951, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.13951

    2025 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    M., et al

    Chen, Z., Do, T., Ghez, A. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 79, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca8ad

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    2024, ApJ, 974, 277, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad79ff

    Chen, Z.-f., Chen, Z.-G., Peng, X.-l., & Huang, W.-r. 2024, ApJ, 974, 277, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad79ff

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    E., McKernan, B., Ford, K

    Cook, H. E., McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.10590, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.10590

    2024 doi arXiv

  29. [37]

    B., & Lin, D

    Davies, M. B., & Lin, D. N. C. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 3452, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2590

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    2023a, MNRAS, 523, 1126, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1412 —

    DeLaurentiis, S., Epstein-Martin, M., & Haiman, Z. 2023a, MNRAS, 523, 1126, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1412 —. 2023b, MNRAS, 523, 1126, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1412

    doi

  31. [39]

    Delfavero, V., Ford, K. E. S., McKernan, B., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.18815, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.18815 Di Matteo, T., Springel, V., & Hernquist, L. 2005, Nature, 433, 604, doi: 10.1038/nature03335

    2024 doi arXiv

  32. [40]

    J., Dempsey, A

    Dittmann, A. J., Dempsey, A. M., & Li, H. 2024, ApJ, 964, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad23ce

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08138, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08138 D’Orazio, D

    Dodici, M., & Tremaine, S. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08138, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08138 D’Orazio, D. J., & Loeb, A. 2020, PhRvD, 101, 083031, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.101.083031

    2024 doi arXiv

  34. [42]

    S., Caban, F., et al

    Fabj, G., Nasim, S. S., Caban, F., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 2608, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3004

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    2024, MNRAS, 535, 3630, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2499

    Fabj, G., & Samsing, J. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 3630, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2499

    2024 doi

  36. [44]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab518b

    Justham, S. 2019, ApJ, 887, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab518b

    2019 doi

  37. [45]

    Ford, K. E. S., & McKernan, B. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5827, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2861

    2022 doi

  38. [46]

    Ford, K. E. S., Bartos, I., McKernan, B., et al. 2019, BAAS, 51, 247, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1903.09529

    2019 doi arXiv

  39. [47]

    2019, MNRAS, 488, 47, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1651

    Perna, R. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 47, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1651

    2019 doi

  40. [48]

    M., Impey, C

    Gabor, J. M., Impey, C. D., Jahnke, K., et al. 2009, ApJ, 691, 705, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/691/1/705

    2009 doi

  41. [49]

    A., Bonnerot, C., & Gerosa, D

    Gangardt, D., Trani, A. A., Bonnerot, C., & Gerosa, D. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3689, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1117

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 1339, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2711

    Mayer, L. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 1339, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2711

    2022 doi

  43. [51]

    2023, ApJL, 945, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acbfb8

    Gayathri, V., Wysocki, D., Yang, Y., et al. 2023, ApJL, 945, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acbfb8

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    2021a, ApJL, 920, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2cc1

    Gayathri, V., Yang, Y., Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., & Bartos, I. 2021a, ApJL, 920, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2cc1

    doi

  45. [53]

    2021b, ApJL, 908, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abe388 —

    Gayathri, V., Healy, J., Lange, J., et al. 2021b, ApJL, 908, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abe388 —. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 344, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01568-w 23

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    C., Metzger, B

    Generozov, A., Stone, N. C., Metzger, B. D., & Ostriker, J. P. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 4030, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1262

    2018 doi

  47. [55]

    2003, ApJ, 594, 812, doi: 10.1086/377127

    Genzel, R., Sch¨ odel, R., Ott, T., et al. 2003, ApJ, 594, 812, doi: 10.1086/377127

    2003 doi

  48. [56]

    2019, PhRvD, 100, 041301, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.041301

    Gerosa, D., & Berti, E. 2019, PhRvD, 100, 041301, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.041301

    2019 doi

  49. [57]

    M., Wright, S

    Ghez, A. M., Wright, S. A., Matthews, K., et al. 2004, ApJL, 601, L159, doi: 10.1086/382024

    2004 doi

  50. [58]

    Y., Ostriker, J

    Gnedin, O. Y., Ostriker, J. P., & Tremaine, S. 2014, ApJ, 785, 71, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/785/1/71 Gond´ an, L., & Kocsis, B. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 3299, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1985 Gonz´ alez-Mart ´ ın, O., Masegosa, J., M´ arquez, I., Guainazzi, M., & Jim´ enez-Bail´ on, E. 2009...

    2014 doi

  51. [59]

    Goodman, J., & Tan, J. C. 2004, ApJ, 608, 108, doi: 10.1086/386360

    2004 doi

  52. [60]

    J., Ford, K

    Graham, M. J., Ford, K. E. S., McKernan, B., et al. 2020a, PhRvL, 124, 251102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.251102

    doi

  53. [61]

    J., Ross, N

    Graham, M. J., Ross, N. P., Stern, D., et al. 2020b, MNRAS, 491, 4925, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3244

    doi

  54. [62]

    J., McKernan, B., Ford, K

    Graham, M. J., McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 942, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca480

    2023 doi

  55. [63]

    Grishin, E., Gilbaum, S., & Stone, N. C. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.07546, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2307.07546 Gr¨ obner, M., Ishibashi, W., Tiwari, S., Haney, M., &

    2023 doi arXiv

  56. [64]

    2020, A&A, 638, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037681

    Jetzer, P. 2020, A&A, 638, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037681

    2020 doi

  57. [65]

    J., Mori, K., Bauer, F

    Hailey, C. J., Mori, K., Bauer, F. E., et al. 2018, Nature, 556, 70, doi: 10.1038/nature25029

    2018 doi

  58. [66]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.01743, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.01743

    Han, W.-B., Yang, S.-C., Tagawa, H., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.01743, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.01743

    2024 doi arXiv

  59. [67]

    M., Jiang, Y.-F., & Armitage, P

    Hankla, A. M., Jiang, Y.-F., & Armitage, P. J. 2020, ApJ, 902, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb4df

    2020 doi

  60. [68]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    C., Hut, P., & McMillan, S

    Heggie, D. C., Hut, P., & McMillan, S. L. W. 1996, ApJ, 467, 359, doi: 10.1086/177611 Hern´ andez-Garc ´ ıa, L., Chakraborty, J., S´ anchez-S´ aez, P., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02523-9

    1996 doi

  62. [70]

    Hills, J. G. 1975, AJ, 80, 809, doi: 10.1086/111815 —. 1988, Nature, 331, 687, doi: 10.1038/331687a0

    1975 doi

  63. [71]

    Ho, L. C. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 475, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110546

    2008 arXiv

  64. [72]

    F., Squire, J., Su, K.-Y., et al

    Hopkins, P. F., Squire, J., Su, K.-Y., et al. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 19, doi: 10.21105/astro.2310.04506

    2024

  65. [73]

    2006a, ApJL, 645, L133, doi: 10.1086/506273 —

    Hopman, C., & Alexander, T. 2006a, ApJL, 645, L133, doi: 10.1086/506273 —. 2006b, ApJ, 645, 1152, doi: 10.1086/504400

    doi

  66. [74]

    K., & Malkan, M

    Hunt, L. K., & Malkan, M. A. 1999, ApJ, 516, 660, doi: 10.1086/307150

    1999 doi

  67. [75]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  68. [76]

    2017, PhRvD, 96, 063014, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.063014

    Inayoshi, K., Tamanini, N., Caprini, C., & Haiman, Z. 2017, PhRvD, 96, 063014, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.063014

    2017 doi

  69. [77]

    S., Dittmann, A

    Jermyn, A. S., Dittmann, A. J., McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., & Cantiello, M. 2022, ApJ, 929, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5d40 Jim´ enez, M. A., & Masset, F. S. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 4917, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1946

    2022 doi

  70. [78]

    2006, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 23, S125, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/23/8/S17

    Kawamura, S., Nakamura, T., Ando, M., et al. 2006, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 23, S125, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/23/8/S17

    2006 doi

  71. [79]

    Kim, Y., & Most, E. R. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.12359, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.12359

    2024 doi arXiv

  72. [80]

    R., Lubow, S

    King, A. R., Lubow, S. H., Ogilvie, G. I., & Pringle, J. E. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 49, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09378.x

    2005

  73. [81]

    M., McIver, J., Naoz, S., et al

    Knee, A. M., McIver, J., Naoz, S., et al. 2024, ApJL, 971, L38, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6a10

    2024 doi

  74. [82]

    2011, PhRvD, 84, 024032, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.024032

    Kocsis, B., Yunes, N., & Loeb, A. 2011, PhRvD, 84, 024032, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.024032

    2011 doi

  75. [83]

    Kormendy, J., & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 511, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811

    2013 doi

  76. [84]

    S., Sijacki, D., et al

    Koudmani, S., Somerville, R. S., Sijacki, D., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 60, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1422

    2024 doi

  77. [85]

    2024a, PhRvD, 110, 123017, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.123017

    Kritos, K., Reali, L., Gerosa, D., & Berti, E. 2024a, PhRvD, 110, 123017, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.123017

    doi

  78. [86]

    2024b, PhRvD, 110, 043023, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.043023

    Kritos, K., Strokov, V., Baibhav, V., & Berti, E. 2024b, PhRvD, 110, 043023, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.043023

    doi

  79. [87]

    2022, ApJL, 938, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac98ad

    Lazzati, D., Soares, G., & Perna, R. 2022, ApJL, 938, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac98ad

    2022 doi

  80. [88]

    Leigh, N. W. C., Geller, A. M., McKernan, B., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 5672, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3134

    2018 doi

  81. [89]

    2007, MNRAS, 374, 515, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11155.x

    Levin, Y. 2007, MNRAS, 374, 515, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11155.x

    2007

  82. [90]

    2022a, ApJ, 934, 154, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c0d

    Li, J., Lai, D., & Rodet, L. 2022a, ApJ, 934, 154, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c0d

    doi

  83. [91]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 1602, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2577

    Li, R., & Lai, D. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 1602, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2577

    2022 doi

  84. [92]

    Li, Y.-P., Chen, Y.-X., Lin, D. N. C., & Wang, Z. 2022b, ApJL, 928, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac5b61 24

    doi

  85. [93]

    O., Zlochower, Y., Dotti, M., & Volonteri, M

    Lousto, C. O., Zlochower, Y., Dotti, M., & Volonteri, M. 2012, PhRvD, 85, 084015, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.85.084015

    2012 doi

  86. [94]

    2025, PhRvD, 111, 083033, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.111.083033

    Ma, Z.-P., Wang, K., Wu, Q., & Wang, J.-M. 2025, PhRvD, 111, 083033, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.111.083033

    2025 doi

  87. [95]

    MacLeod, M., & Lin, D. N. C. 2020, ApJ, 889, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab64db

    2020 doi

  88. [96]

    2014, ARA&A, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615 Maga˜ na Hernandez, I., & Palmese, A

    Madau, P., & Dickinson, M. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615 Maga˜ na Hernandez, I., & Palmese, A. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.02460, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.02460

    2014 doi arXiv

  89. [97]

    Mandel, I., & Broekgaarden, F. S. 2022, Living Reviews in Relativity, 25, 1, doi: 10.1007/s41114-021-00034-3

    2022 doi

  90. [98]

    McKernan, B., & Ford, K. E. S. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2309.15213, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.15213

    2023 doi arXiv

  91. [99]

    McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Callister, T., et al. 2022a, MNRAS, 514, 3886, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1570

    doi

  92. [100]

    McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Cantiello, M., et al. 2022b, MNRAS, 514, 4102, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1310

    doi

  93. [101]

    McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Cook, H. E., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.16515, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.16515

    2024 doi arXiv

  94. [102]

    Winter, L. M. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 900, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu553

    2014 doi

  95. [103]

    McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Lyra, W., & Perets, H. B. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 460, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21486.x

    2012

  96. [104]

    McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., & O’Shaughnessy, R. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 4088, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2681

    2020 doi

  97. [106]

    McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Bellovary, J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 866, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadae5

    2018 doi

  98. [107]

    McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Bartos, I., et al. 2019, ApJL, 884, L50, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab4886 Milosavljevi´ c, M., & Merritt, D. 2003, ApJ, 596, 860, doi: 10.1086/378086 Miralda-Escud´ e, J., & Gould, A. 2000, ApJ, 545, 847, doi: 10.1086/317837

    2019 doi

  99. [108]

    J., Schutt, T

    Mori, K., Hailey, C. J., Schutt, T. Y. E., et al. 2021, ApJ, 921, 148, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1da5

    2021 doi

  100. [109]

    1993, ApJ, 408, 496, doi: 10.1086/172607

    Morris, M. 1993, ApJ, 408, 496, doi: 10.1086/172607

    1993 doi

  101. [110]

    S., Fabj, G., Caban, F., et al

    Nasim, S. S., Fabj, G., Caban, F., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 5393, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1295

    2023 doi

  102. [111]

    Natarajan, P., & Armitage, P. J. 1999, MNRAS, 309, 961, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02917.x

    1999

  103. [112]

    P., & Gressel, O

    Nelson, R. P., & Gressel, O. 2010, MNRAS, 409, 639, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17327.x

    2010

  104. [113]

    2020, A&A Rv, 28, 4, doi: 10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0

    Neumayer, N., Seth, A., & B¨ oker, T. 2020, A&A Rv, 28, 4, doi: 10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0

    2020 doi

  105. [114]

    2024, A&A, 689, A305, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450480

    Olejak, A., Klencki, J., Xu, X.-T., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A305, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450480

    2024 doi

  106. [115]

    Ostriker, E. C. 1999, ApJ, 513, 252, doi: 10.1086/306858

    1999 doi

  107. [116]

    Ostriker, J. P. 1983, ApJ, 273, 99, doi: 10.1086/161351

    1983 doi

  108. [117]

    J., Baruteau, C., Crida, A., & Kley, W

    Paardekooper, S. J., Baruteau, C., Crida, A., & Kley, W. 2010, MNRAS, 401, 1950, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15782.x

    2010

  109. [118]

    M., Assef, R

    Padovani, P., Alexander, D. M., Assef, R. J., et al. 2017, A&A Rv, 25, 2, doi: 10.1007/s00159-017-0102-9

    2017 doi

  110. [119]

    R., Mucesh, S., & Hartley, W

    Palmese, A., Bom, C. R., Mucesh, S., & Hartley, W. G. 2023, ApJ, 943, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca6e3

    2023 doi

  111. [120]

    J., Annis, J., & Liu, X

    Palmese, A., Fishbach, M., Burke, C. J., Annis, J., & Liu, X. 2021, ApJL, 914, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac0883

    2021 doi

  112. [121]

    Papaloizou, J. C. B., & Larwood, J. D. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 823, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03466.x

    2000

  113. [122]

    R., & Bicknell, G

    Parkin, E. R., & Bicknell, G. V. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 2281, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1450

    2013 doi

  114. [123]

    2021, MNRAS, 505, 1324, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1419

    Peng, P., & Chen, X. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 1324, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1419

    2021 doi

  115. [124]

    Peters, P. C. 1964, Physical Review, 136, 1224, doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.136.B1224

    1964 doi

  116. [125]

    Postiglione, J., Ford, K. E. S., Best, H., McKernan, B., & O’Dowd, M. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.10591, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.10591

    2025 doi

  117. [126]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 1409, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1263

    McKernan, B. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 1409, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1263

    2024 doi

  118. [127]

    2024, ApJ, 962, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1b53

    Qian, K., Li, J., & Lai, D. 2024, ApJ, 962, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1b53

    2024 doi

  119. [128]

    P., & Tremaine, S

    Rauch, K. P., & Tremaine, S. 1996, NewA, 1, 149, doi: 10.1016/S1384-1076(96)00012-7

    1996 doi

  120. [129]

    X., Ballmer, S., et al

    Reitze, D., Adhikari, R. X., Ballmer, S., et al. 2019, in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 51, 35, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1907.04833

    2019 doi arXiv

  121. [130]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.16113, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.16113

    Renzo, M., & Smith, N. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.16113, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.16113

    2024 doi arXiv

  122. [131]

    Reynolds, C. S. 2021, ARA&A, 59, 117, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-035022

    2021 doi

  123. [132]

    L., Zevin, M., Amaro-Seoane, P., et al

    Rodriguez, C. L., Zevin, M., Amaro-Seoane, P., et al. 2019, PhRvD, 100, 043027, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.043027

    2019 doi

  124. [133]

    L., Weatherford, N

    Rodriguez, C. L., Weatherford, N. C., Coughlin, S. C., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac2edf Rodr ´ ıguez-Ram ´ ırez, J. C., Nemmen, R., & Bom, C. R. 2025, PhRvD, 111, 083020, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.111.083020

    2022 doi

  125. [134]

    D., & Thrane, E

    Romero-Shaw, I., Lasky, P. D., & Thrane, E. 2022, ApJ, 940, 171, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9798 25

    2022 doi

  126. [135]

    2020, ApJL, 903, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbe26

    Bustillo, J. 2020, ApJL, 903, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbe26

    2020 doi

  127. [136]

    P., Graham, M

    Ross, N. P., Graham, M. J., Calderone, G., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 2339, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2415

    2020 doi

  128. [137]

    2023, MNRAS, 524, 2770, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1926

    Rowan, C., Boekholt, T., Kocsis, B., & Haiman, Z. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 2770, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1926

    2023 doi

  129. [138]

    2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.23739, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.23739 —

    Rowan, C., Whitehead, H., Fabj, G., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.23739, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.23739 —. 2025b, MNRAS, 539, 1501, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf547

    doi

  130. [139]

    Rozner, M., Generozov, A., & Perets, H. B. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 866, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad603

    2023 doi

  131. [140]

    Ryu, T., McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 8103, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3487

    2024 doi

  132. [141]

    J., et al

    Samsing, J., Bartos, I., D’Orazio, D. J., et al. 2022, Nature, 603, 237, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-04333-1 S´ anchez-S´ aez, P., Hern´ andez-Garc ´ ıa, L., Bernal, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347957 S´ anchez-Salcedo, F. J., & Chametla, R. O. 2014,...

    2022 doi

  133. [142]

    B., Soifer, B

    Sanders, D. B., Soifer, B. T., Elias, J. H., et al. 1988, ApJ, 325, 74, doi: 10.1086/165983

    1988 doi

  134. [143]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.12998, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.12998

    Santini, A., Gerosa, D., Cotesta, R., & Berti, E. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.12998, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.12998

    2023 doi arXiv

  135. [144]

    2019, ApJ, 878, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab20ca —

    Secunda, A., Bellovary, J., Mac Low, M.-M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 878, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab20ca —. 2020, ApJ, 903, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbc1d

    2019 doi

  136. [145]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

    Shakura, N. I., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, A&A, 24, 337

    1973

  137. [146]

    2007, MNRAS, 380, 877, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12153.x

    Sijacki, D., Springel, V., Di Matteo, T., & Hernquist, L. 2007, MNRAS, 380, 877, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12153.x

    2007

  138. [147]

    M., et al

    Silpa, S., Kharb, P., Harrison, C. M., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 4208, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1044

    2022 doi

  139. [148]

    2003, MNRAS, 341, 501, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06431.x

    Sirko, E., & Goodman, J. 2003, MNRAS, 341, 501, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06431.x

    2003

  140. [149]

    1982, MNRAS, 200, 115, doi: 10.1093/mnras/200.1.115

    Soltan, A. 1982, MNRAS, 200, 115, doi: 10.1093/mnras/200.1.115

    1982 doi

  141. [150]

    2023, Physical Review X, 13, 021035, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.13.021035

    Speri, L., Antonelli, A., Sberna, L., et al. 2023, Physical Review X, 13, 021035, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.13.021035

    2023 doi

  142. [151]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.13589, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.13589

    Stegmann, J., Gerosa, D., Romero-Shaw, I., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.13589, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.13589

    2025 doi

  143. [152]

    J., et al

    Stern, D., McKernan, B., Graham, M. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 27, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac726

    2018 doi

  144. [153]

    C., Metzger, B

    Stone, N. C., Metzger, B. D., & Haiman, Z. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 946, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2260

    2017 doi

  145. [154]

    2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 48, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0611-0

    Storchi-Bergmann, T., & Schnorr-M¨ uller, A. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 48, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0611-0

    2019 doi

  146. [155]

    J., & Rees, M

    Syer, D., Clarke, C. J., & Rees, M. J. 1991, MNRAS, 250, 505, doi: 10.1093/mnras/250.3.505

    1991 doi

  147. [156]

    2020a, ApJ, 899, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba2cc

    Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., Bartos, I., & Kocsis, B. 2020a, ApJ, 899, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba2cc

    doi

  148. [157]

    2020b, ApJ, 898, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c

    Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., & Kocsis, B. 2020b, ApJ, 898, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c

    doi

  149. [158]

    S., & Haiman, Z

    Tagawa, H., Kimura, S. S., & Haiman, Z. 2023a, ApJ, 955, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace71d

    doi

  150. [159]

    2023b, ApJL, 946, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acc103 —

    Bartos, I. 2023b, ApJL, 946, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acc103 —. 2024, ApJ, 966, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2e0b

    2024 doi

  151. [160]

    2021, ApJL, 907, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abd4d3

    Tagawa, H., Kocsis, B., Haiman, Z., et al. 2021, ApJL, 907, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abd4d3

    2021 doi

  152. [161]

    Tanaka, H., & Ward, W. R. 2004, ApJ, 602, 388, doi: 10.1086/380992 The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, the KAGRA Collaboration, & Abbott, R. e. a. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2111.03606, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2111.03606

    2004 doi arXiv

  153. [162]

    A., Quataert, E., & Murray, N

    Thompson, T. A., Quataert, E., & Murray, N. 2005, ApJ, 630, 167, doi: 10.1086/431923

    2005 doi

  154. [163]

    A., & Di Cintio, P

    Trani, A. A., & Di Cintio, P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.02173, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.02173

    2025 doi

  155. [164]

    2017, MNRAS, 470, 1121, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1160

    Tremmel, M., Karcher, M., Governato, F., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 1121, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1160

    2017 doi

  156. [165]

    Watson, M. G. 2014, ApJ, 786, 104, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/786/2/104

    2014 doi

  157. [166]

    P., Mapelli, M., P´ erigois, C., et al

    Vaccaro, M. P., Mapelli, M., P´ erigois, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A51, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348509

    2024 doi

  158. [167]

    Vajpeyi, A., Thrane, E., Smith, R., McKernan, B., & Saavik Ford, K. E. 2022, ApJ, 931, 82, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6180

    2022 doi

  159. [168]

    C., H´ ebert, F., & Zhang, H

    Varma, V., Gerosa, D., Stein, L. C., H´ ebert, F., & Zhang, H. 2019, PhRvL, 122, 011101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.011101

    2019 doi

  160. [169]

    M., & van Velzen, S

    Veronesi, N., Rossi, E. M., & van Velzen, S. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 6031, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3157

    2023 doi

  161. [170]

    M., van Velzen, S., & Buscicchio, R

    Veronesi, N., Rossi, E. M., van Velzen, S., & Buscicchio, R. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 2092, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1346

    2022 doi

  162. [171]

    M., & Storey-Fisher, K

    Veronesi, N., van Velzen, S., Rossi, E. M., & Storey-Fisher, K. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 375, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2575

    2025 doi

  163. [172]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd77d

    Ajith, P. 2023, ApJ, 954, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd77d

    2023 doi

  164. [173]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 26

    2020 doi

  165. [174]

    Wang, Y., Zhu, Z., & Lin, D. N. C. 2024a, MNRAS, 528, 4958, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae321 —. 2024b, MNRAS, 528, 4958, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae321

    doi

  166. [175]

    2021, ApJL, 923, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac400a

    Wang, Y.-H., McKernan, B., Ford, S., et al. 2021, ApJL, 923, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac400a

    2021 doi

  167. [176]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 4656, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1430

    Whitehead, H., Rowan, C., Boekholt, T., & Kocsis, B. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 4656, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1430

    2024 doi

  168. [177]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.23899, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.23899

    Whitehead, H., Rowan, C., & Kocsis, B. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.23899, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.23899

    2025 doi

  169. [178]

    Wong, K. W. K., Baibhav, V., & Berti, E. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 5665, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2077

    2019 doi

  170. [179]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.19570, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.19570

    Xue, L., Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., & Bartos, I. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.19570, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.19570

    2025 doi

  171. [180]

    2024, ApJS, 274, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad5961

    Yamada, S., Kawamuro, T., Mizumoto, M., et al. 2024, ApJS, 274, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad5961

    2024 doi

  172. [181]

    2021, ApJ, 921, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2233

    Yang, G., Estrada-Carpenter, V., Papovich, C., et al. 2021, ApJ, 921, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2233

    2021 doi

  173. [182]

    I., Papovich, C., et al

    Yang, G., Caputi, K. I., Papovich, C., et al. 2023, ApJL, 950, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd639

    2023 doi

  174. [183]

    2019a, ApJ, 876, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab16e3

    Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., et al. 2019a, ApJ, 876, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab16e3

    doi

  175. [184]

    2019b, PhRvL, 123, 181101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.181101

    Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Gayathri, V., et al. 2019b, PhRvL, 123, 181101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.181101

    doi

  176. [185]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.10395, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.10395

    Zhang, S.-R., Wang, Y., Yuan, Y.-F., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.10395, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.10395

    2025 doi

  177. [186]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.02924, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.02924

    Zhu, L.-G., & Chen, X. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.02924, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.02924

    2025 doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.