Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Emission and detection of ultra high frequency gravitational waves from highly eccentric orbits of compact binary systems

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Eccentric orbits hurt high-frequency gravitational-wave detection

desk verdict Eccentric orbits do not improve resonant-cavity UHF GW detection only under a specific noise-integration prescription; the in-band energy actually rises with eccentricity, so the headline conclusion is conditional on the detector-response model. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.01582 v2 pith:GKKF5B5E submitted 2024-12-02 gr-qc astro-ph.COastro-ph.HE

Pierre Jamet , Aurélien Barrau , Killian Martineau This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcastro-ph.COastro-ph.HE
keywords gravitationalwavesultrahighfrequencyeccentricorbitscompactbinarycoalescenceresonantcavitiessignal-to-noiseratioprimordialblackholesDickeradiometer
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 asks whether highly eccentric orbits of merging black-hole binaries could improve the chances of detecting their gravitational waves in the ultrahigh-frequency (GHz) band with resonant cavities. At fixed masses and emission frequency, eccentric orbits do radiate more gravitational-wave energy within the detector's narrow bandwidth than circular orbits. But when the measurement process is modeled, the signal-to-noise ratio actually decreases with eccentricity, because the cavity integrates noise over the entire window during which the signal's sweeping frequency crosses the narrow band. The paper concludes that circular orbits give the optimistic benchmark and that the distance limits derived for circular orbits can only be lowered for eccentric trajectories. If true, this rules out a hoped-for boost from eccentric bursts in current resonant-cavity setups.

What carries the argument

The central object is the effective time $t_{\rm eff}$ entering the Dicke radiometer formula ${\rm SNR} \sim \frac{P_{\rm sig}}{k_B T_{\rm sys}} \sqrt{t_{\rm eff}/\Delta\nu}$. The paper modifies $t_{\rm eff}$ in two steps: first, from the total physical time $t_{\Delta\nu}$ spent in the bandwidth to $t_{\rm eff} \sim t_{\Delta\nu}^2 / t_{\rm int}$, where $t_{\rm int}$ is the full window from first entrance to last exit, because noise is integrated over that whole window; second, the cavity charging time is folded in by the replacement $Q \to \nu t_{\Delta\nu}$. Together these prescriptions reverse the naive eccentricity advantage and make the circular orbit the best case.

What would settle it

A full numerical simulation of the cavity's response to the time-dependent strain of an eccentric binary, computing the SNR directly without the $t_{\rm eff}$ prescription, would settle the question; if it shows the SNR increasing with eccentricity, the paper's central conclusion fails. Concretely, one could take the time-frequency sweep of a highly eccentric inspiral and convolve it with a damped-oscillator impulse response, comparing the resulting SNR against the Dicke-approximation result.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For a binary of light black holes in an elliptic orbit, the instantaneous gravitational-wave frequency sweeps through the cavity bandwidth many times, producing repeated bursts, and the total energy deposited in the band rises with initial eccentricity (modulo jumps when an extra orbit enters the band). The signal-to-noise ratio, however, is a decreasing function of eccentricity once the noise integrated over the full observation window—from first to last bandwidth crossing—is accounted for. The circular orbit, whose frequency spends one long interval in the band, wins because the noise penalty of long integration outweighs the extra signal energy of the bursts. Hence the upper limits on the distance at which such binaries can be detected are not improved, and are in fact tightened, by considering elliptic trajectories. This conclusion is presented as a lowest-order clarification using the same approximations as the circular-orbit studies it compares against.

Load-bearing premise

The main conclusion rests on the assumption that the cavity integrates noise over the whole time between the first and last crossing of the bandwidth, while the signal power is evaluated with the steady-state formula—if instead the effective time were simply the time the signal spends in the bandwidth, the trend would invert and eccentric orbits would look better.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Circular-orbit distance limits become the optimistic benchmark, and eccentric trajectories can only shorten the reachable distance for resonant-cavity searches.
  • No near-future detection of ultrahigh-frequency gravitational waves from compact black-hole binaries is expected with this technique under this model.
  • A single orbit crossing the bandwidth nearly tangentially can dominate the received energy, but this does not rescue detection because the noise is integrated over the whole window.
  • The main conclusion is robust to the initial orbital phase: averaged over phases, the signal-to-noise ratio is far below the few optimized spikes.
  • The result is expected to hold for all resonant-cavity detectors operating around the GHz range, not just the specific benchmark considered.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the full cavity-response simulation currently being developed confirms the noise-integration hypothesis, the circular-orbit limits become a firm upper bound for resonant-cavity searches at these frequencies.
  • Because the Newtonian framework applies to higher masses and lower signal frequencies, the conclusion may extend beyond the GHz band, though detector behavior at those frequencies would need separate modeling.
  • Since the total radiated energy genuinely increases with eccentricity, burst-search or wide-band analysis techniques that avoid long noise integration could in principle restore an eccentricity advantage; this is my extension, not a claim of the paper.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies gravitational waves in the ultrahigh-frequency band emitted by highly eccentric compact binary systems, modeled in a Newtonian framework with quadrupole radiation and period-averaged backreaction. The authors derive the two strain polarizations, the coupled evolution equations for the semimajor axis, eccentricity, and orbital phase, and numerically compute the time spent by the signal inside the detector bandwidth as the orbit shrinks and circularizes. The main physical result is that the total gravitational-wave energy collected within the bandwidth increases with eccentricity, but the signal-to-noise ratio, evaluated through a Dicke radiometer formula with an effective integration time, is found to decrease with eccentricity, so that circular orbits remain the most favorable for resonant-cavity detection. The paper concludes that upper limits on detectable distances derived for circular orbits are not improved by eccentric trajectories.

Significance. If the central conclusion is validated, the paper is significant for the ultrahigh-frequency gravitational-wave community: it provides the first detailed treatment of eccentric orbits for resonant-cavity detectors, corrects the naive expectation that eccentricity-driven bursts improve detectability, and establishes that circular-orbit limits are the optimistic benchmark. The manuscript is also useful as a pedagogical reference, deriving the strain equations and the orbital evolution system from first principles and explicitly listing its approximations. The authors deserve credit for checking that time-averaging versus full integration does not change their qualitative conclusions, and for presenting the crossing-time extraction and energy statistics in a transparent way. The main limitation is that the SNR reversal depends on a detector-response prescription that the authors themselves flag as a hypothesis pending a full cavity simulation; the headline conclusion therefore remains conditional, not fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III C, Eq. (9), Figs. 11-12] The central claim of the paper, that SNR decreases with eccentricity, is entirely contained in the switch from teff = t_delta_nu (Fig. 11, where SNR increases with eccentricity) to teff ~ t_delta_nu^2/tint (Fig. 12, where SNR decreases). This switch is justified by the statement that the detector integrates noise over the full window from first to last bandwidth crossing, but no derivation from the cavity response is given; as the authors write, a full simulation is 'currently being developed to confirm the validity of this hypothesis.' A burst-matched or windowed analysis would in principle realize a different effective time, and the manuscript does not rule out that such an analysis would invert the trend. Since the abstract and Sec. IV present the reversed trend as a definitive conclusion, the manuscript needs either a proper derivation or simulation of the cavity response, or a clear statement that the conclusion is conditional on this specific noise-integration hypothesis.
  2. [Sec. III C, Fig. 13] The charging-time correction Q -> nu*t_delta_nu and the associated factor (t_ind_delta_nu/t_min)^2 are also introduced as a hypothesis, described as a 'meaningfully worst case scenario.' Because Fig. 13 is combined with Fig. 12 to produce the final all-effects SNR in Fig. 14, the final conclusion is doubly dependent on unvalidated detector-response assumptions. The authors should either validate this correction or clearly mark Figs. 13 and 14 as upper/lower sensitivity bounds rather than as the expected SNR.
  3. [Sec. IV and Abstract] The abstract and the concluding section state that 'the higher the eccentricity, the lower the signal-to-noise ratio' and that the upper limit on distance 'can only be decreased when considering highly eccentric trajectories.' This is stronger than what the analysis supports, given that the authors themselves list the Dicke radiometer formula as 'certainly not the final word' and the effective-time prescription as a hypothesis. The conclusions should be reframed as conditional on the assumed noise-integration and charging-time model, with the alternative analysis techniques (e.g., temporal or matched-filter methods) explicitly acknowledged in the abstract or main conclusions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix, Eq. (26)] The expression for B_n appears to contain a typo: B_n = b^2/n (J_{n+2}(ne) - J_{n+2}(ne)) is identically zero, which cannot be the intended Peters-Mathews coefficient; please correct the Bessel-function arguments.
  2. [Introduction] Line: 'There is no reason for the real system be be tuned' contains a duplicated 'be' and should read 'to be tuned.'
  3. [Sec. III A] The sentence beginning 'It the next section' should read 'In the next section.'
  4. [Sec. III C] The text refers to 'the Dick radiometer formula' and 'the fact the the detector'; both should be corrected to 'Dicke' and 'the fact that the detector.'
  5. [Sec. IV] The claim that 'we have explicitly checked that our conclusions are unchanged when the time averaging procedure is replaced by a full integration' is not supported by any figure or table in the manuscript; a brief quantitative statement or a plot would make this check verifiable.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Minor self-citation in the cavity-charging correction is present, but the central eccentric-versus-circular SNR reversal is derived independently from quadrupole dynamics plus a clearly stated teff hypothesis.

  1. other [Sec. III C, paragraph beginning "For the sake of completeness, it is also interesting to focus on another, more subtle, effect." and Sec. IV discussion]
    "Owing to the finite charging time of the cavity, the quality factor entering Eq. 10 should also be modified [16,30]: Q → νt∆ν ... The detailed motivations for this, maybe surprising, factor are given in our previous work [16]. A full simulation of the cavity response, beyond the scope of this article, is currently being developed to confirm the validity of this hypothesis."

    The only self-referential element in the derivation is this cavity-charging correction: its justification is a citation to the authors' previous [16], and the same paragraph admits it is a hypothesis pending a full simulation. Because the correction enters the final 'all effects' SNR curves, part of the final plotted result inherits an unvalidated self-cited model ingredient. This is not the core of the paper's reversal, however: the reversal is already produced in Fig. 12 by the separately argued teff ~ t∆ν^2/tint prescription, and the paper states the charging-time effect is subdominant except for very small eccentricities. The self-citation is therefore minor rather than load-bearing, but it is a real unverified self-referential input.

full rationale

The paper's own derivation chain is largely self-contained: h+ and h× (Eqs. 4-5), a-dot/e-dot (Eqs. 6-7), and the harmonic power spectrum (Eq. 23) follow from textbook quadrupole formulas, with no parameter fitted to the final SNR curves. The received energy and bandwidth-crossing times are obtained by numerical integration of those equations. The main reversal in Fig. 12 comes from the stated detector-integration assumption teff ~ t∆ν^2/tint (noise integrated over the whole window from first entry to last exit), which is a modeling choice, explicitly contrasted with the alternative teff = t∆ν in Fig. 11; the paper transparently labels it as the key hypothesis. That assumption could be wrong, in which case a matched-filter or burst-triggered analysis might restore an increasing SNR with eccentricity, but that is a correctness risk, not a circular reduction. The only self-citation-related element is the Q → νt∆ν cavity-charging correction from [16] (with external [30]); the paper itself calls it an unconfirmed hypothesis and says it is subdominant except at very small eccentricity, so it is a minor self-referential input, not the source of the central conclusion. No imported uniqueness theorem, no ansatz smuggled via citation, and no renaming of known results occur.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No quantities are fitted to data in this paper; all curves are computed from the quadrupole formulas with stated benchmark or scan parameters. The listed free parameters are experimental benchmarks (Q, eta) or initial-condition choices (phi0, masses, omega_p,0) whose variation the authors argue does not change the qualitative conclusion, with the phi0 dependence explicitly characterized. The genuine model freedom sits in the two effective-time prescriptions (items 4 and 5 under axioms), which are the load-bearing hypotheses for the central SNR reversal.

free parameters (5)
  • Cavity quality factor Q = 10^5
    Benchmark value from [8,16] representing GrAHal-type haloscopes; used in Eq. (10) and in the initial condition omega_p,0 = omega_det(1 - Q^-1). Not fitted; common to all compared trajectories.
  • Coupling coefficient eta = 0.1
    Set to a reasonable value following [8,19]; appears in the signal power, Eq. (10), and is identical for circular and elliptic cases.
  • Initial true anomaly phi0 = -pi (apoapsis)
    Chosen for definiteness. Fig. 15 shows SNR varies by orders of magnitude with phi0; the paper argues typicality via average and median over phi0. A scan parameter, not a fit.
  • Individual black hole mass = 1.5 x 10^-6 solar masses for illustrative runs, then 5 x 10^-7 solar masses for the main analysis
    Chosen to keep the system far from merger so the quasi-elliptic and Newtonian approximations hold; the qualitative conclusion is claimed to be mass-independent.
  • Initial periapsis angular frequency omega_p,0 = omega_det(1 - Q^-1)
    Starts the signal one bandwidth below the detector frequency to avoid losing energy below band; described as a purely technical choice.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Newtonian quadrupole strain formulas (Eqs. 4-5, 11-14) with second time derivatives taken at fixed orbital parameters (a, e)
    Textbook result from [22]; the Appendix explicitly notes that keeping (a,e) constant during differentiation is sufficient for this study although this is not a priori obvious.
  • domain assumption Period-averaged Peters-Matthews backreaction (Eqs. 6-7, 19-20) applied at each time step to a quasi-elliptic orbit
    The trajectory is assumed to remain an ellipse at each instant with slowly evolving parameters; the authors list this as the second stated approximation in Sec. IV.
  • domain assumption Signal is monochromatic at each instant, with instantaneous frequency dphi/dt divided by 2pi
    Fourth stated approximation in Sec. IV: only the peak of the Fourier transform is used.
  • ad hoc to paper Steady-state validity of the Dicke radiometer formula (Eq. 10) with modified effective times, in particular teff ~ (tDeltaNu)^2/tint
    Introduced in Sec. III C; it drives the main SNR reversal and the paper states a full cavity response simulation is under development to confirm it.
  • ad hoc to paper Cavity charging time correction Q -> nu*tDeltaNu and SNR factor (t_avg_in_band/t_min)^2
    Taken from the authors' prior work [16]; described as a worst-case scenario leading to conservative sensitivity estimates.
  • domain assumption Post-Newtonian corrections are negligible for masses well below the merger bound at 1 GHz
    Third stated approximation in Sec. IV; limits the mass range, motivating the 5 x 10^-7 solar mass choice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Emission and detection of ultra high frequency gravitational waves from highly eccentric orbits of compact binary systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GKKF5B5E

@misc{pith2026241201582,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Emission and detection of ultra high frequency gravitational waves from highly eccentric orbits of compact binary systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GKKF5B5E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.01582}
}
read the original abstract

The ultrahigh frequency emission of gravitational waves by binary systems of black holes has recently been investigated in details in the framework of new experimental ideas around resonant cavities. In this article, we consider the case of elliptic trajectories. At fixed masses and frequency, we conclude that the total amount of energy radiated by the system within the bandwidth of the detector can be significantly higher than for circular orbits. However, owing to subtle experimental effects, the signal-to-noise ratio is, overall, a decreasing function of the eccentricity. Limits on the maximum distance at which a merging system of black holes can be detected derived are therefore not improved by considering elliptic trajectories, when compared to the circular case. The article is written as pedagogically as possible so as to be accessible to the nonfamiliar reader and possibly useful beyond the ultrahigh frequency case.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.01582 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Time evolution of the “plus” polarization of the strain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Time evolution of the “cross” polarization of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. FIG. 6. Amount of gravitational energy (in arbitrary units) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Time evolution of the eccentricity (in blue), orbital [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Time-frequency plot for a first eccentricity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Time-frequency plot for a first eccentricity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Time spent by the signal within the bandwidth of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. SNR (not normalized) as a function of the eccen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. SNR (not normalized) as a function of the eccentric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. SNR (not normalized) as a function of the eccen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_13.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. SNR (not normalized) as a function of the initial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. SNR (not normalized) as a function of the eccen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_16.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. Main parameters of an elliptic orbit. The center [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_18.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. Cavity Multimodes as an Array for High-Frequency Gravitational Waves

    hep-ph 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A 9-cell microwave cavity's 18 modes can act as a synthetic detector array that reconstructs the direction, polarization, and chirp of a high-frequency gravitational-wave signal.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Abbott et al

    R. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, Virgo, and LIGO Scientific Collaborations), GWTC-3: Compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the second part of the third observing run, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    LISA collaboration, Laser interferometer space antenna (2017), arXiv:1702.00786 [astro-ph.IM]

    arXiv 2017

  3. [3]

    Agazie et al

    G. Agazie et al. (NANOGrav Collaboration), The NANOGrav 15 yr data set: Evidence for a gravitational- wave background, Astrophys. J. Lett. 951, L8 (2023), arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Antoniadis et al.(EPTA, InPTA Collaborations), The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Ar- ray - III

    J. Antoniadis et al.(EPTA, InPTA Collaborations), The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Ar- ray - III. Search for gravitational wave signals, Astron. Astrophys. 678, A50 (2023), arXiv:2306.16214 [astro- ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    D. J. Reardon et al., Search for an isotropic gravitational- wave background with the Parkes pulsar timing array, Astrophys. J. Lett. 951, L6 (2023), arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Goryachev, W

    M. Goryachev, W. M. Campbell, I. S. Heng, S. Gal- liou, E. N. Ivanov, and M. E. Tobar, Rare events de- tected with a bulk acoustic wave high frequency grav- itational wave antenna, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 071102 (2021), arXiv:2102.05859 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Goryachev and M

    M. Goryachev and M. E. Tobar, Gravitational wave de- tection with high frequency phonon trapping acoustic cavities, Phys. Rev. D 90, 102005 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Berlin, D

    A. Berlin, D. Blas, R. Tito D’Agnolo, S. A. R. Ellis, R. Harnik, Y. Kahn, and J. Sch¨ utte-Engel, Detecting high-frequency gravitational waves with microwave cavi- ties, Phys. Rev. D 105, 116011 (2022), arXiv:2112.11465 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2022

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Berlin, D

    A. Berlin, D. Blas, R. Tito D’Agnolo, S. A. R. Ellis, R. Harnik, Y. Kahn, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel, and M. Wentzel, Electromagnetic cavities as mechanical bars for grav- itational waves, Phys. Rev. D 108, 084058 (2023), arXiv:2303.01518 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Domcke, C

    V. Domcke, C. Garcia-Cely, and N. L. Rodd, Novel search for high-frequency gravitational waves with low-mass ax- 12 ion haloscopes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 041101 (2022), arXiv:2202.00695 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  3. [11]

    This means that in a hypothetical setting which would FIG

    Interestingly, modulo the expected jumps (that are now smoother as the mass has been reduced), the trend is still an increase of the sensitivity with the eccentricity. This means that in a hypothetical setting which would FIG. 11. SNR (not normalized) as a function of the ecce...

  4. [12]

    worst case scenario

    Very importantly, the trend is entirely reversed. The signal-to-noise ratio is now a decreasing function of the eccentricity. The circular case e1 = 0 is now the best one. The reason is obvious: for a circular orbit, the frequency spends only one—quite long—interval of time wi...

  5. [13]

    Domcke and C

    V. Domcke and C. Garcia-Cely, Potential of radio tele- scopes as high-frequency gravitational wave detectors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 021104 (2021), arXiv:2006.01161 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Herman, A

    N. Herman, A. F˝ uzfa, L. Lehoucq, and S. Clesse, Detect- ing planetary-mass primordial black holes with resonant electromagnetic gravitational-wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 104, 023524 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    Aggarwal et al., Challenges and opportunities of gravitational-wave searches at MHz to GHz frequencies, Living Rev

    N. Aggarwal et al., Challenges and opportunities of gravitational-wave searches at MHz to GHz frequencies, Living Rev. Relativity 24, 4 (2021), arXiv:2011.12414 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Herman, A

    N. Herman, A. F¨ uzfa, L. Lehoucq, and S. Clesse, Detect- ing planetary-mass primordial black holes with resonant electromagnetic gravitational-wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 104, 023524 (2021), arXiv:2012.12189 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Franciolini, A

    G. Franciolini, A. Maharana, and F. Muia, Hunt for light primordial black hole dark matter with ultrahigh- frequency gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D 106, 103520 (2022), arXiv:2205.02153 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Barrau, J

    A. Barrau, J. Garc ` ıa-Bellido, T. Grenet, and K. Mar- tineau, Prospects for detection of ultra high frequency gravitational waves from compact binary coalescenses with resonant cavities, 2303.06006 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Teuscher, A

    M. Teuscher, A. Barrau, and K. Martineau, Elemen- tary considerations on gravitational waves from hyper- bolic encounters, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 56, 89 (2024), arXiv:2402.10706 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Barrau, J

    A. Barrau, J. Garc ´ ıa-Bellido, K. Martineau, and M. Teuscher, Prospects for detection of ultra high fre- quency gravitational waves from hyperbolic encounters with resonant cavities, Phys. Rev. D 111, 063535 (2025), arXiv:2404.08379 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    J. R. Valero, J. R. N. Madrid, D. Blas, A. D. Mor- cillo, I. G. Irastorza, B. Gimeno, and J. M. Cabrera, High-frequency gravitational waves detection with the BabyIAXO haloscopes, Phys. Rev. D111, 043024 (2025), arXiv:2407.20482 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Domcke, C

    V. Domcke, C. Garcia-Cely, S. M. Lee, and N. L. Rodd, Symmetries and selection rules: optimising axion halo- scopes for Gravitational Wave searches, J. High Energy Phys. 03, 128, arXiv:2306.03125 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Carr and F

    B. Carr and F. Kuhnel, Primordial black holes as dark matter: recent developments, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 70, 355 (2020), arXiv:2006.02838 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Maggiore, Gravitational Waves: Volume 1: Theory and Experiments (Oxford University Press, 2008)

    M. Maggiore, Gravitational Waves: Volume 1: Theory and Experiments (Oxford University Press, 2008)

    2008

  17. [25]

    Maggiore, Gravitational Waves

    M. Maggiore, Gravitational Waves. Vol. 1: Theory and Experiments, Oxford Master Series in Physics (Oxford University Press, New York, 2007)

    2007

  18. [26]

    Blachier, A

    B. Blachier, A. Barrau, K. Martineau, and C. Renevey, Competitive effects between gravitational radiation and mass variation for two-body systems in circular orbits, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 56, 20 (2024), arXiv:2306.09069 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Grenet, R

    T. Grenet, R. Ballou, Q. Basto, K. Martineau, P. Per- rier, P. Pugnat, J. Quevillon, N. Roch, and C. Smith, The Grenoble Axion Haloscope platform (GrAHal): De- velopment plan and first results (2021), arXiv:2110.14406 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Grenet, The Grenoble Axion Haloscope project, https://indico.cern.ch/event/1119695/ contributions/5033901/attachments/2530598/ 4354011/GrAHal%20project%20FIPs22_v2.pdf

    T. Grenet, The Grenoble Axion Haloscope project, https://indico.cern.ch/event/1119695/ contributions/5033901/attachments/2530598/ 4354011/GrAHal%20project%20FIPs22_v2.pdf

  21. [29]

    Boschini, N

    M. Boschini, N. Loutrel, D. Gerosa, and G. Fuma- galli, Orbital eccentricity in general relativity from catastrophe theory, Phys. Rev. D 111, 024008 (2024), arXiv:2411.00098 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Sikivie, Invisible axion search methods, Rev

    P. Sikivie, Invisible axion search methods, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 015004 (2021), arXiv:2003.02206 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Berlin et al., Searches for new particles, dark mat- ter, and gravitational waves with SRF cavities (2022), arXiv:2203.12714 [hep-ph]

    A. Berlin et al., Searches for new particles, dark mat- ter, and gravitational waves with SRF cavities (2022), arXiv:2203.12714 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    D. Kim, J. Jeong, S. Youn, Y. Kim, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Revisiting the detection rate for ax- ion haloscopes, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03, 066, arXiv:2001.05605 [hep-ex]

    2001 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Levi, Effective field theories of post-Newtonian grav- ity: A comprehensive review, Rep

    M. Levi, Effective field theories of post-Newtonian grav- ity: A comprehensive review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 83, 075901 (2020), arXiv:1807.01699 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.