pith. machine review for the scientific record.
sign in

arxiv: 2509.13638 · v3 · submitted 2025-09-17 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE· astro-ph.IM

An Implementation to Identify the Properties of Multiple Population of Gravitational Wave Sources

Meesum Qazalbash , Muhammad Zeeshan , Richard O'Shaughnessy This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 17:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HEastro-ph.IM
keywords gravitational wavespopulation inferencecompact binariesBayesian inferencesoftware frameworkJAXnormalizing flows
0
0 comments X

The pith

A JAX-based framework called GWKokab allows separate modeling of rates for different gravitational wave source populations like black hole binaries and neutron star binaries.

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

The paper introduces a software framework designed to analyze the properties of multiple populations of gravitational wave sources at once. It aims to overcome the computational limits of previous methods by using efficient sampling techniques. If successful, this would let researchers extract more detailed information about how these binaries form and evolve from the growing number of detections. The authors show it works on synthetic data and matches results from earlier studies on real catalog data.

Core claim

GWKokab is a JAX-based framework that supports modular construction of models with independent rate functions for each subpopulation of compact binary mergers. It incorporates a normalizing flow sampler called flowMC for accelerated Bayesian inference and is compatible with NumPyro. Validation on synthetic spinning eccentric and circular populations demonstrates recovery of injected parameters, including eccentricity distributions, at lower computational cost, and it reproduces known results from non-spinning eccentric models and GWTC-4 mass distributions.

What carries the argument

GWKokab, a modular JAX framework for multi-population rate modeling combined with flowMC normalizing flow sampler for inference.

If this is right

  • Researchers can analyze subpopulations like BBH, BNS, and NSBH with independent parameters more easily.
  • Computational cost for population inference is significantly reduced.
  • Eccentricity distributions can be recovered even in spinning populations.
  • More detailed studies of mass, spin, eccentricity, and redshift distributions become feasible.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This modular rate setup could be extended to test formation channel models by assigning different priors to each subpopulation.
  • Faster sampling might support joint analyses that combine gravitational wave data with electromagnetic observations of the same events.
  • The framework's design invites checks on whether independent rate models change inferred merger rates compared to single-population assumptions.

Load-bearing premise

The framework's samplers will reliably produce unbiased results on actual gravitational wave observations without needing case-by-case adjustments or encountering sampling failures in complex models.

What would settle it

Running the framework on real gravitational wave catalog data and comparing the inferred subpopulation properties to those obtained from established slower methods; significant discrepancies would indicate the claim does not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.13638 by Meesum Qazalbash, Muhammad Zeeshan, Richard O'Shaughnessy.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The rapidly increasing sensitivity of gravitational wave detectors is enabling the detection of a growing number of compact binary mergers. These events are crucial for understanding the population properties of compact binaries. However, many previous studies rely on computationally expensive inference frameworks, limiting their scalability. In this work, we present GWKokab, a JAX-based framework that enables modular model building with independent rate for each subpopulation such as BBH, BNS, and NSBH binaries. It provides accelerated inference using the normalizing flow based sampler called flowMC and is also compatible with NumPyro samplers. To validate our framework, we generated two synthetic populations, one comprising spinning eccentric binaries and the other circular binaries using a multi-source model. We then recovered their injected parameters at significantly reduced computational cost and demonstrated that eccentricity distribution can be recovered even in spinning eccentric populations. We also reproduced results from two prior studies: one on non-spinning eccentric populations, and another on the BBH mass distribution using the third Gravitational Wave Transient Catalog (GWTC-4). We anticipate that GWKokab will not only reduce computational costs but also enable more detailed subpopulation analyses such as their mass, spin, eccentricity, and redshift distributions in gravitational wave events, offering deeper insights into compact binary formation and evolution.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents GWKokab, a JAX-based software framework that supports modular construction of hierarchical population models for gravitational-wave sources, with independent rate parameters for distinct subpopulations such as BBH, BNS, and NSBH binaries. Inference is performed with the flowMC normalizing-flow sampler (also compatible with NumPyro), and the framework is validated by recovering injected parameters from two synthetic populations (one spinning-eccentric, one circular) at reduced computational cost, by recovering the eccentricity distribution in the spinning case, and by reproducing selected results from prior studies on non-spinning eccentric populations and the BBH mass distribution in GWTC-4.

Significance. If the central performance claims hold, the modular independent-rate construction combined with flowMC sampling would lower the computational barrier for joint inference over multiple subpopulations, enabling more detailed studies of mass, spin, eccentricity, and redshift distributions that are currently limited by the cost of standard samplers.

major comments (3)
  1. Validation section (synthetic population recovery): the claim that injected parameters are recovered 'at significantly reduced computational cost' is not supported by any quantitative metrics such as wall-clock times, effective sample sizes, bias or coverage statistics, or direct comparison against baseline samplers; without these, it is impossible to assess whether flowMC delivers unbiased posteriors for the joint multi-subpopulation model.
  2. Validation section (high-dimensional regime): the reported checks use only low-dimensional injected cases (spinning-eccentric and circular binaries) and do not probe the regime in which subpopulation rates, selection effects, and spin-eccentricity correlations are inferred jointly; this leaves open the possibility of mode collapse or systematic bias when the modular rate construction is applied to realistic GW data.
  3. Reproduction of prior studies: the manuscript states that results from two earlier analyses were reproduced, but does not specify how the independent-rate modular structure was implemented in those reproductions or whether the recovered posteriors remain consistent with the original publications once the new framework is used.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract would be strengthened by inclusion of at least one concrete recovery metric or speedup factor rather than the qualitative statement 'significantly reduced computational cost'.
  2. Notation for the subpopulation rate models and the interface to flowMC could be clarified with a short schematic or pseudocode block to make the modularity explicit for readers unfamiliar with JAX-based samplers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript on GWKokab. We address each major comment point by point below, providing clarifications and committing to revisions that strengthen the validation and reproducibility sections without overstating current results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Validation section (synthetic population recovery): the claim that injected parameters are recovered 'at significantly reduced computational cost' is not supported by any quantitative metrics such as wall-clock times, effective sample sizes, bias or coverage statistics, or direct comparison against baseline samplers; without these, it is impossible to assess whether flowMC delivers unbiased posteriors for the joint multi-subpopulation model.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative support is required to substantiate the performance claim. In the revised manuscript we will report wall-clock times for the flowMC runs on both synthetic datasets, effective sample sizes, and bias/coverage statistics for the recovered parameters. We will also add a limited comparison against a standard sampler (e.g., NumPyro NUTS) on the same models to demonstrate the computational advantage while confirming that posteriors remain unbiased. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Validation section (high-dimensional regime): the reported checks use only low-dimensional injected cases (spinning-eccentric and circular binaries) and do not probe the regime in which subpopulation rates, selection effects, and spin-eccentricity correlations are inferred jointly; this leaves open the possibility of mode collapse or systematic bias when the modular rate construction is applied to realistic GW data.

    Authors: The synthetic tests were intentionally low-dimensional to isolate recovery of individual features such as eccentricity in the presence of spin. The GWTC-4 BBH mass-distribution reproduction already incorporates selection effects and a realistic parameter space. We acknowledge that a full joint high-dimensional synthetic test with all subpopulation rates and correlations was not performed. In revision we will expand the discussion to explicitly address the risk of mode collapse, describe how the independent-rate modular construction is intended to mitigate it, and note the current scope of validation as a limitation. revision: partial

  3. Referee: Reproduction of prior studies: the manuscript states that results from two earlier analyses were reproduced, but does not specify how the independent-rate modular structure was implemented in those reproductions or whether the recovered posteriors remain consistent with the original publications once the new framework is used.

    Authors: We will revise the relevant section to document the exact model configurations, including how independent rates were assigned to subpopulations and how the modular structure was mapped onto the original analyses. We will also include direct posterior comparisons (e.g., median values and credible intervals) with the published results to demonstrate consistency. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Software implementation with independent synthetic validation exhibits no circularity

full rationale

The paper introduces GWKokab as a JAX-based modular framework for subpopulation rate modeling and accelerated inference with flowMC, validated through recovery of parameters from independently generated synthetic populations (spinning-eccentric and circular binaries) plus reproduction of results from prior external studies on GWTC-4 data. No derivation chain exists that reduces predictions or results to fitted inputs by construction, and no self-citations or ansatzes serve as load-bearing justifications for the core claims. The validation benchmarks are external to the framework itself, confirming the implementation is self-contained against independent tests.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard assumptions from gravitational wave population inference literature and the correctness of the flowMC sampler implementation; no new physical axioms or free parameters are introduced in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5771 in / 1112 out tokens · 30953 ms · 2026-05-18T17:02:45.624212+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Population Properties of Binary Black Holes with Eccentricity

    astro-ph.HE 2026-02 conditional novelty 8.0

    First joint population inference on binary black hole eccentricity from GWTC-4 bounds the eccentric branching ratio below 5% at 90% confidence, with results consistent with quasi-circular models but highly model-dependent.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

114 extracted references · 114 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 29 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Expected Rate Estimation The expected number of GW detections can be formulated as an integral over the intrinsic source parameter spaceθand redshiftzmodulated by an appropriate selection (weighting) function. The total expected number of detections summing over all populations is given by µ(Λ) = Z Pdet(θ;z)·ρ(θ|Λ) √gθdθ.(9) HereP det(θ;z)is the detection...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Similarly, waveforms h(f|θ)for a source with intrinsic parameterθat redshiftz are modeled using frequency-domain approximants from the LALSimulationpackage

    Semi Analytical Approach for Detection Probability We estimate the detection probabilityPdet(θ;z)of a source at redshiftzusing a semi-analytical approach that combines 4 numerical evaluation of signal-to-noise(SNR) over a popula- tion sources with theoretical detector sensitivity, as character- ized through one-sided power spectral density (PSD)S n(f) cur...

    work page 2048

  3. [3]

    Therefore, to overcome this, we use a Deep Multi-Layer Perceptron (DMLP) [87] to estimateP det of the sources during inference

    Neural Net Estimator for Detection Probability InterpolatingP det values during inference is computation- ally expensive. Therefore, to overcome this, we use a Deep Multi-Layer Perceptron (DMLP) [87] to estimateP det of the sources during inference. The input layer has one neuron [88] perP det parameter (intrinsic and extrinsic), and the output layer has ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    We have also made the injection recovery by generating posteriors with GWKOKAB

    and BBH mass distribution using third Gravitational- Wave Transient Catalog (GWTC-3) population [9]. We have also made the injection recovery by generating posteriors with GWKOKAB. We have generated two synthetic populations: first, is the spinning eccentric BBH and second is the circular mixture population of BBHs, BNS, NSBH based on the multi- source mo...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Truncated Mass Model

    using the 69 BBH events from the LVK’s GWTC-3 popu- 7 101 102 m1/M⊙ 100 101 102 m2/M⊙ BBH (Powerlaw) BBH (Peak) BNS NSBH G NSBHBNS PL NS Spin BH Spin BBH Spin BBH Spin FIG. 3:Multi-Source Population:The left figure shows multi-population injections for BBH power law(blue), BBH peak (orange), BNS (green), and NSBH (red) with their independent rates. The ri...

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    bounded between0and1. B. Synthetic Population Generation We may want to generate synthetic population for a poten- tial science cases. Therefore, we have provided a flexible ap- plication programming interface (API) in GWKOKABto gen- erate injection for source parameterθand add errors in them to make fake posterior estimates using a previously described s...

    work page arXiv

  7. [7]

    We follow the same procedure as described above to estimate the expected number of detec- tions and posterior distribution of the population parameters

    Non-Evolving Redshift Models For the non-evolving redshift models, we can use the same equation (8) by puttingκ= 0which will remove the red- shift evolution factor(1 +z) κ. We follow the same procedure as described above to estimate the expected number of detec- tions and posterior distribution of the population parameters. The only difference is that we ...

    work page

  8. [8]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, M. R. Abernathy, F. Ac- ernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, T. Adams, P. Addesso, R. X. Ad- hikari, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett116, 061102 (2016), 1602.03837

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  9. [9]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Living Rev. Rel.19, 1 (2016), 1304.0670

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  10. [11]

    Advanced Virgo: a 2nd generation interferometric gravitational wave detector

    F. Acernese et al. (VIRGO), Class. Quant. Grav.32, 024001 (2015), 1408.3978

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  11. [12]

    Akutsu, M

    T. Akutsu, M. Ando, K. Arai, Y . Arai, S. Araki, A. Araya, N. Aritomi, Y . Aso, S. Bae, Y . Bae, et al., Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics2021, 05A101 (2020), ISSN 2050-3911, https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article- pdf/2021/5/05A101/37974994/ptaa125.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/ptaa125

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptaa125 2020

  12. [13]

    GW190814: Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 23 M$_\odot$ Black Hole with a 2.6 M$_\odot$ Compact Object

    R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, S. Abraham, F. Acernese, K. Ack- ley, C. Adams, R. X. Adhikari, V . B. Adya, C. Affeldt, M. Agathos, et al., Astrophysical Journal896, L44 (2020), 2006.12611

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  13. [14]

    B. S. Sathyaprakash and B. F. Schutz, Living Reviews in Rel- ativity12, 2 (2009), 0903.0338

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  14. [15]

    K. S. Thorne,The Generation of Gravitational Waves: A Re- view of Computational Tecniques(Springer US, Boston, MA, 1977), pp. 1–61, ISBN 978-1-4684-0853-9, URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-0853-9_1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-0853-9_1 1977

  15. [16]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, S. Abraham, F. Acer- nese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, R. X. Adhikari, V . B. Adya, C. Af- feldt, et al., Physical Review X9, 031040 (2019), 1811.12907

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  16. [17]

    GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run

    R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, S. Abraham, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, A. Adams, C. Adams, R. X. Adhikari, V . B. Adya, C. Affeldt, et al., Physical Review X11, 021053 (2021), 2010.14527

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  17. [18]

    GWTC-2.1: Deep Extended Catalog of Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run

    R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, N. Adhikari, R. X. Adhikari, V . B. Adya, C. Affeldt, D. Agar- wal, et al., Phys. Rev. D109, 022001 (2024), 2108.01045

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [19]

    A. H. Nitz, C. D. Capano, S. Kumar, Y .-F. Wang, S. Kastha, M. Sch ¨afer, R. Dhurkunde, and M. Cabero, Astrophysical Journal922, 76 (2021), 2105.09151

    work page arXiv 2021

  19. [20]

    Olsen, T

    S. Olsen, T. Venumadhav, J. Mushkin, J. Roulet, B. Zackay, and M. Zaldarriaga, Phys. Rev. D106, 043009 (2022), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevD.106.043009

    work page 2022

  20. [21]

    A. H. Nitz, S. Kumar, Y .-F. Wang, S. Kastha, S. Wu, M. Sch¨afer, R. Dhurkunde, and C. D. Capano, Astrophysical Journal946, 59 (2023), 2112.06878

    work page arXiv 2023

  21. [22]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collabora- tion, the KAGRA Collaboration, A. G. Abac, I. Abouelfet- touh, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adamcewicz, S. Adhicary, D. Adhikari, et al., arXiv e-prints arXiv:2508.18079 (2025), 2508.18079

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [23]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collabora- tion, the KAGRA Collaboration, A. G. Abac, I. Abouelfet- touh, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, S. Adhicary, D. Adhikari, N. Adhikari, et al., arXiv e-prints arXiv:2508.18081 (2025), 2508.18081

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [24]

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, J. Aasi, B. P. Abbott, R. Ab- bott, T. Abbott, M. R. Abernathy, K. Ackley, C. Adams, T. Adams, P. Addesso, et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity 32, 074001 (2015), 1411.4547

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [25]

    Acernese, M

    F. Acernese, M. Agathos, K. Agatsuma, D. Aisa, N. Alle- mandou, A. Allocca, J. Amarni, P. Astone, G. Balestri, G. Ballardin, et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 024001 (2014), URLhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1088/ 0264-9381/32/2/024001

    work page 2014

  25. [26]

    (KAGRA) 2019 Nature Astron

    Kagra Collaboration, T. Akutsu, M. Ando, K. Arai, Y . Arai, S. Araki, A. Araya, N. Aritomi, H. Asada, Y . Aso, et al., Na- ture Astronomy3, 35 (2019), 1811.08079

    work page arXiv 2019

  26. [27]

    Akutsu et al

    T. Akutsu, M. Ando, K. Arai, Y . Arai, S. Araki, A. Araya, N. Aritomi, Y . Aso, S. Bae, Y . Bae, et al., Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics2021, 05A101 (2021), 2005.05574

    work page arXiv 2021

  27. [28]

    The population of merging compact binaries inferred using gravitational waves through GWTC-3

    R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, N. Adhikari, R. X. Adhikari, V . B. Adya, C. Affeldt, D. Agar- 13 wal, et al., Physical Review X13, 011048 (2023), 2111.03634

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [29]

    H. Tong, S. Galaudage, and E. Thrane, Phys. Rev. D106, 103019 (2022), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.103019

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.103019 2022

  29. [30]

    W. M. Farr, S. Stevenson, M. C. Miller, I. Mandel, B. Farr, and A. Vecchio, Nature548, 426 (2017), 1706.01385

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  30. [31]

    Constraining black-hole spins with gravitational wave observations

    V . Tiwari, S. Fairhurst, and M. Hannam, Astrophysical Journal 868, 140 (2018), 1809.01401

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [32]

    Wysocki, J

    D. Wysocki, J. Lange, and R. O’Shaughnessy, Phys. Rev. D 100, 043012 (2019), 1805.06442

    work page arXiv 2019

  32. [33]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collabo- ration, and the KAGRA Collaboration, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2508.18083 (2025), 2508.18083

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [34]

    The first gravitational-wave source from the isolated evolution of two 40-100 Msun stars

    K. Belczynski, D. E. Holz, T. Bulik, and R. O’Shaughnessy, Nature534, 512 (2016), 1602.04531

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  34. [35]

    Romero-Shaw, P

    I. Romero-Shaw, P. D. Lasky, and E. Thrane, Astrophysical Journal940, 171 (2022), 2206.14695

    work page arXiv 2022

  35. [36]

    Romero-Shaw, P

    I. Romero-Shaw, P. D. Lasky, E. Thrane, and J. Calder ´on Bustillo, Astrophysical Journal903, L5 (2020), 2009.04771

    work page arXiv 2020

  36. [37]

    Zevin, I

    M. Zevin, I. M. Romero-Shaw, K. Kremer, E. Thrane, and P. D. Lasky, Astrophysical Journal921, L43 (2021), 2106.09042

    work page arXiv 2021

  37. [38]

    Maggio, H

    E. Maggio, H. O. Silva, A. Buonanno, and A. Ghosh, Phys. Rev. D108, 024043 (2023), 2212.09655

    work page arXiv 2023

  38. [39]

    A. K. Mehta, A. Buonanno, R. Cotesta, A. Ghosh, N. Sen- nett, and J. Steinhoff, Phys. Rev. D107, 044020 (2023), 2203.13937

    work page arXiv 2023

  39. [40]

    Tests of General Relativity with Binary Black Holes from the second LIGO-Virgo Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog

    R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, S. Abraham, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, A. Adams, C. Adams, R. X. Adhikari, V . B. Adya, C. Affeldt, et al., Phys. Rev. D103, 122002 (2021), 2010.14529

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  40. [41]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, M. R. Abernathy, F. Ac- ernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, T. Adams, P. Addesso, R. X. Ad- hikari, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett116, 221101 (2016), 1602.03841

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  41. [42]

    M. Isi, K. Chatziioannou, and W. M. Farr, Phys. Rev. Lett123, 121101 (2019), 1904.08011

    work page arXiv 2019

  42. [43]

    C. L. Rodriguez, M. Morscher, B. Pattabiraman, S. Chat- terjee, C.-J. Haster, and F. A. Rasio, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 029901 (2016), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.029901

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.029901 2016

  43. [44]

    Gerosa and E

    D. Gerosa and E. Berti, Phys. Rev. D95, 124046 (2017), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevD.95.124046

    work page 2017

  44. [45]

    Belczynski et al., Nature534, 512 (2016)

    K. Belczynski et al., Nature534, 512 (2016)

    work page 2016

  45. [46]

    The Astrophysical Journal905(1), 40 (2020) https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ abc7c4 arXiv:2011.04657

    M. Zevin, S. S. Bavera, C. P. L. Berry, V . Kalogera, T. Fra- gos, P. Marchant, C. L. Rodriguez, F. Antonini, D. E. Holz, and C. Pankow, The Astrophysical Journal910, 152 (2021), URLhttps://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ abe40e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ 2021

  46. [47]

    Galaudage, C

    S. Galaudage, C. Talbot, T. Nagar, D. Jain, E. Thrane, and I. Mandel, The Astrophysical Journal Letters936, L18 (2022), URLhttps://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ ac85df

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ 2022

  47. [48]

    Wang, Y .-J

    Y .-Z. Wang, Y .-J. Li, J. S. Vink, Y .-Z. Fan, S.-P. Tang, Y . Qin, and D.-M. Wei, The Astrophysical Journal Let- ters941, L39 (2022), URLhttps://dx.doi.org/10. 3847/2041-8213/aca89f

    work page 2022

  48. [49]

    Roulet, H

    J. Roulet, H. S. Chia, S. Olsen, L. Dai, T. Venumadhav, B. Za- ckay, and M. Zaldarriaga, Phys. Rev. D104, 083010 (2021), 2105.10580

    work page arXiv 2021

  49. [50]

    Wysocki and R

    D. Wysocki and R. O’Shaughnessy,Bayesian parametric population models(2017), URL bayesian-parametric-population-models. readthedocs.io

    work page 2017

  50. [51]

    Talbot, R

    C. Talbot, R. Smith, E. Thrane, and G. B. Poole, Phys. Rev. D 100, 043030 (2019), 1904.02863

    work page arXiv 2019

  51. [53]

    Talbot (2021), URLhttps://git.ligo.org/ RatesAndPopulations/gwpopulation_pipe

    C. Talbot (2021), URLhttps://git.ligo.org/ RatesAndPopulations/gwpopulation_pipe

    work page 2021

  52. [54]

    Edelman, B

    B. Edelman, B. Farr, and Z. Doctor, Astrophysical Journal 946, 16 (2023), 2210.12834

    work page arXiv 2023

  53. [55]

    Edelman, B

    B. Edelman, B. Farr, and Z. Doctor,Gravitational-wave hi- erarchical inference with numpyro(2023), URLhttps:// github.com/FarrOutLab/GWInferno

    work page 2023

  54. [56]

    Landry,Tools for neutron star population modeling and inference with gravitational-wave observations(2021), URL https://github.com/landryp/sodapop

    P. Landry,Tools for neutron star population modeling and inference with gravitational-wave observations(2021), URL https://github.com/landryp/sodapop

    work page 2021

  55. [57]

    Mastrogiovanni, G

    S. Mastrogiovanni, G. Pierra, S. Perri `es, D. Laghi, G. C. San- toro, A. Ghosh, R. Gray, C. Karathanasis, and K. Leyde, A&A 682, A167 (2024)

    work page 2024

  56. [58]

    Mastrogiovanni, G

    S. Mastrogiovanni, G. Pierra, S. Perri `es, D. Laghi, G. C. San- toro, A. Ghosh, R. Gray, C. Karathanasis, and K. Leyde, Icarogw pure python package to estimate population proper- ties of noisy observations(2023), URLhttps://github. com/simone-mastrogiovanni/icarogw

    work page 2023

  57. [59]

    Fishbach, W

    M. Fishbach, W. M. Farr, and D. E. Holz, Astrophysical Jour- nal891, L31 (2020), 1911.05882

    work page arXiv 2020

  58. [60]

    Farah,Gwmockcat the gravitational wave mock cata- log generator(2022), URLhttps://git.ligo.org/ amanda.farah/mock-PE

    A. Farah,Gwmockcat the gravitational wave mock cata- log generator(2022), URLhttps://git.ligo.org/ amanda.farah/mock-PE

    work page 2022

  59. [61]

    et.al.,gwax: Gravitational-wave astronomy in jax(2024), URLhttps://github.com/mdmould/gwax

    W. et.al.,gwax: Gravitational-wave astronomy in jax(2024), URLhttps://github.com/mdmould/gwax

    work page 2024

  60. [63]

    K. W. K. Wong, G. Contardo, and S. Ho, Phys. Rev. D101, 123005 (2020), 2002.09491

    work page arXiv 2020

  61. [64]

    Leyde, S

    K. Leyde, S. R. Green, A. Toubiana, and J. Gair, Phys. Rev. D 109, 064056 (2024), 2311.12093

    work page arXiv 2024

  62. [65]

    Talbot and E

    C. Talbot and E. Thrane, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2012.01317 (2020), 2012.01317

    work page arXiv 2012

  63. [66]

    Gerardi, S

    F. Gerardi, S. M. Feeney, and J. Alsing, Phys. Rev. D104, 083531 (2021), 2104.02728

    work page arXiv 2021

  64. [67]

    Mould, D

    M. Mould, D. Gerosa, and S. R. Taylor, Phys. Rev. D106, 103013 (2022), 2203.03651

    work page arXiv 2022

  65. [68]

    D. Ruhe, K. Wong, M. Cranmer, and P. Forr ´e, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2211.09008 (2022), 2211.09008

    work page arXiv 2022

  66. [69]

    A. Ray, I. Maga ˜na Hernandez, K. Breivik, and J. Creighton, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2404.03166 (2024), 2404.03166

    work page arXiv 2024

  67. [70]

    Tiwari, Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 155007 (2021), 2006.15047

    V . Tiwari, Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 155007 (2021), 2006.15047

    work page arXiv 2021

  68. [71]

    R. O. Meesum Qazalbash, Muhammad Zeeshan,GWKokab: A jax-based gravitational-wave population inference toolkit (2024), URLhttps://github.com/gwkokab/ gwkokab

    work page 2024

  69. [72]

    Bradbury, R

    J. Bradbury, R. Frostig, P. Hawkins, M. J. Johnson, C. Leary, D. Maclaurin, G. Necula, A. Paszke, J. Vander- Plas, S. Wanderman-Milne, et al.,JAX: composable trans- formations of Python+NumPy programs(2018), URLhttp: //github.com/jax-ml/jax

    work page 2018

  70. [73]

    et.al.,flowMC: Normalizing-flow enhanced sampling pack- age for probabilistic inference(2022), URLhttps:// github.com/kazewong/flowMC

    W. et.al.,flowMC: Normalizing-flow enhanced sampling pack- age for probabilistic inference(2022), URLhttps:// github.com/kazewong/flowMC

    work page 2022

  71. [75]

    Gabri ´e, G

    M. Gabri ´e, G. M. Rotskoff, and E. Vanden-Eijnden, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.119, e2109420119 (2022), 2105.12603

    work page arXiv 2022

  72. [76]

    Extracting distribution parameters from multiple uncertain observations with selection biases

    I. Mandel, W. M. Farr, and J. R. Gair, MNRAS486, 1086 (2019), 1809.02063. 14

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  73. [77]

    Wofford, A

    J. Wofford, A. Yelikar, H. Gallagher, E. Champion, D. Wysocki, V . Delfavero, J. Lange, C. Rose, V . Valsan, S. Morisaki, et al., arXiv e-prints arXiv:2210.07912 (2022), 2210.07912

    work page arXiv 2022

  74. [78]

    Zeeshan and R

    M. Zeeshan and R. O’Shaughnessy, Phys. Rev. D110, 063009 (2024), 2404.08185

    work page arXiv 2024

  75. [79]

    Heinzel, M

    J. Heinzel, M. Mould, S. ´Alvarez-L´opez, and S. Vitale, Phys. Rev. D111, 063043 (2025), 2406.16813

    work page arXiv 2025

  76. [80]

    Thrane and C

    E. Thrane and C. Talbot, Publications of the Astronomical So- ciety of Australia36, e010 (2019), 1809.02293

    work page arXiv 2019

  77. [81]

    T. J. Loredo, inBayesian Inference and Maximum En- tropy Methods in Science and Engineering: 24th Interna- tional Workshop on Bayesian Inference and Maximum Entropy Methods in Science and Engineering, edited by R. Fischer, R. Preuss, and U. V . Toussaint (2004), vol. 735 ofAmeri- can Institute of Physics Conference Series, pp. 195–206, astro- ph/0409387

    work page arXiv 2004

  78. [82]

    W. M. Farr, J. R. Gair, I. Mandel, and C. Cutler, Phys. Rev. D91, 023005 (2015), URLhttps://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.023005

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.023005 2015

  79. [83]

    K. W. k. Wong, M. Gabri ´e, and D. Foreman-Mackey, J. Open Source Softw.8, 5021 (2023), 2211.06397

    work page arXiv 2023

  80. [84]

    arxiv/2204.00461

    R. Essick and W. Farr, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2204.00461 (2022), 2204.00461

    work page arXiv 2022

Showing first 80 references.