pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06312 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · 🌀 gr-qc

Recognition: no theorem link

Black Hole-Boson Star Binaries: Gravitational Wave Signals and Tidal Disruption

Gareth Arturo Marks , Seppe J. Staelens , Ulrich Sperhake
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc
keywords black hole boson star binariesgravitational wavestidal disruptionscalar self-interactionquartic potentialsolitonic potentialnumerical relativityexotic compact objects
0
0 comments X

The pith

An appropriate scalar self-interaction can suppress tidal disruption of boson stars by black holes in binary systems.

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

The paper runs fully nonlinear simulations of black hole plus boson star binaries, first in head-on collisions and then in preliminary inspirals. It shows that the scalar potential chosen for the boson star changes how much gravitational radiation is produced and whether the star survives the encounter intact. With a quartic self-interaction the boson star avoids being torn apart, while other choices lead to disruption. This matters because the resulting waveforms differ and therefore affect the construction of search templates for exotic compact objects. The authors also demonstrate that only equilibrated initial data for the boson star yields reliable waveforms.

Core claim

In head-on collisions the amount of gravitational radiation emitted depends on the scalar potential. In inspiraling runs, a quartic self-interaction term prevents the boson star from undergoing tidal disruption, so the binary remains intact and produces a distinct gravitational-wave signal compared with cases that suffer disruption.

What carries the argument

The scalar potential of the boson star, with its quartic self-interaction term versus a solitonic form, which governs stability against tidal forces from the companion black hole.

If this is right

  • Head-on collisions produce noticeably different radiative efficiencies depending on the scalar potential.
  • The quartic self-interaction keeps the boson star intact through inspiral, preserving a longer orbital phase.
  • The resulting gravitational waveforms differ enough to require that model-agnostic template banks incorporate the choice of scalar potential.
  • Only equilibrated initial data for the boson star avoids large constraint violations and inaccurate signals.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Boson stars with tuned self-interactions might produce signals that lack the disruption signatures expected from less stable objects.
  • Other scalar potentials or parameter choices could be tested to see whether they also suppress disruption.
  • Detection of an undisrupted inspiral would constrain the possible scalar field models that describe such stars.
  • Extending the simulations to include spin or eccentricity would show how those parameters interact with the self-interaction effect.

Load-bearing premise

The boson star must begin in an equilibrated initial configuration, otherwise constraint violations appear and the computed waveforms become inaccurate.

What would settle it

A simulation of an inspiral with the quartic self-interaction that nevertheless exhibits clear tidal disruption of the boson star would contradict the reported suppression.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06312 by Gareth Arturo Marks, Seppe J. Staelens, Ulrich Sperhake.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Schematic representation of the correction to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Total energy radiated in GWs for a selection of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.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 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Total energy emitted as GWs for equal-mass head-on BS-BH collisions against maximum compactness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Total energy radiated in GWs for a selection of equal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. The fraction of the Noether charge [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Snapshots of the energy density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Total energy emitted in GWs for equal-mass head-on BS-BH collisions against maximum compactness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Real part of the dominant (2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Snapshots of the energy density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Snapshots of the scalar-field amplitude (normalized by the central amplitude of each BS in equilibrium) before, during [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Resolution study of the total energy emitted as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_16.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a detailed, fully nonlinear study of binary systems involving one black hole and one boson star, considering the effects of both a quartic self-interaction and a solitonic potential for the scalar field. First, we show the importance of using initial data for which the boson star is in an equilibrated configuration to obtain accurate gravitational waveforms, and discuss methods to further improve constraint violations in the initial data. We then present a series of head-on collisions, showing that even in this simplified scenario the radiative efficiency varies significantly with the scalar potential chosen. In addition to this, we present a preliminary study of inspiral configurations, showing that an appropriate scalar self-interaction can suppress tidal disruption. We comment throughout on implications for attempts to build model-agnostic waveform template banks for exotic compact objects.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents fully nonlinear numerical relativity simulations of black hole-boson star binaries. It first demonstrates that equilibrated initial data for the boson star are required to obtain accurate gravitational waveforms and discusses methods to reduce constraint violations. Head-on collision simulations show that radiative efficiency varies with the choice of scalar potential (quartic self-interaction versus solitonic). A preliminary inspiral study indicates that an appropriate scalar self-interaction can suppress tidal disruption, with comments on implications for model-agnostic waveform template banks for exotic compact objects.

Significance. If the central numerical results hold under further verification, the work provides a useful contribution to the modeling of boson stars as exotic compact objects in binaries. The finding that scalar self-interaction can alter disruption outcomes is relevant for gravitational-wave searches and for distinguishing boson-star signals from black-hole or neutron-star binaries. The emphasis on initial-data equilibration addresses a practical numerical issue in the field.

major comments (2)
  1. [Inspiral configurations] Inspiral section: the claim that 'an appropriate scalar self-interaction can suppress tidal disruption' is presented as the outcome of a preliminary study, but lacks quantitative metrics (e.g., boson-star mass loss fraction, survival time to disruption, or comparison of density profiles) and resolution studies to establish that the suppression is physical rather than numerical. This is load-bearing for the strongest claim.
  2. [Initial data construction] Initial-data and methods sections: while the importance of equilibrated configurations is stated, the manuscript does not report specific convergence tests, constraint-violation norms (e.g., L2 norms of the Hamiltonian constraint), or waveform error bars across resolutions for either the head-on or inspiral cases. Without these, the accuracy improvement cannot be quantified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figures] Figure captions and labels should explicitly state the boson-star compactness, mass ratio, and scalar potential parameters used in each run to allow direct comparison with the text.
  2. [Discussion] The discussion of implications for waveform template banks would benefit from a brief comparison to existing boson-star or exotic-compact-object waveform efforts in the literature.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and indicate the changes we plan to implement in the revised version.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Inspiral configurations] Inspiral section: the claim that 'an appropriate scalar self-interaction can suppress tidal disruption' is presented as the outcome of a preliminary study, but lacks quantitative metrics (e.g., boson-star mass loss fraction, survival time to disruption, or comparison of density profiles) and resolution studies to establish that the suppression is physical rather than numerical. This is load-bearing for the strongest claim.

    Authors: We agree that the inspiral results are presented as preliminary and that the absence of quantitative metrics and resolution studies limits the strength of the claim. In the revised manuscript we will add boson-star mass-loss fractions, survival times prior to any disruption, and direct comparisons of density profiles at selected times. We will also include a resolution study for the key inspiral runs to demonstrate that the reported suppression of tidal disruption is robust. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Initial data construction] Initial-data and methods sections: while the importance of equilibrated configurations is stated, the manuscript does not report specific convergence tests, constraint-violation norms (e.g., L2 norms of the Hamiltonian constraint), or waveform error bars across resolutions for either the head-on or inspiral cases. Without these, the accuracy improvement cannot be quantified.

    Authors: We acknowledge that quantitative measures of convergence and constraint violations are needed to substantiate the improvement obtained from equilibrated initial data. In the revised manuscript we will report L2 norms of the Hamiltonian constraint for multiple resolutions, together with waveform comparisons and associated error estimates, for both the head-on and inspiral configurations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in numerical simulation study

full rationale

The paper reports results from fully nonlinear numerical relativity simulations of black hole-boson star binaries, comparing different scalar self-interaction potentials. Central claims (variation of radiative efficiency in head-on collisions; suppression of tidal disruption in inspirals with suitable potential) are direct outputs of the evolved spacetimes and extracted waveforms, not analytic derivations that reduce to the paper's own inputs or fitted parameters by construction. The emphasis on equilibrated initial data is a standard methodological precondition for constraint satisfaction and waveform accuracy, not a self-referential prediction. No load-bearing steps rely on self-citation chains, uniqueness theorems imported from prior author work, or ansatzes smuggled via citation. The study is self-contained against external benchmarks such as standard GR binary simulations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the Einstein-scalar field equations with two chosen potentials, the assumption of asymptotic flatness, and the numerical evolution scheme; no new entities are postulated beyond the standard boson-star construction.

free parameters (2)
  • scalar self-interaction coupling
    The strength of the quartic or solitonic term is chosen to demonstrate suppression of tidal disruption.
  • boson star mass and compactness
    Initial boson-star parameters are selected to produce equilibrated configurations.
axioms (2)
  • standard math Einstein equations coupled to a complex scalar field with self-interaction potential
    Invoked throughout as the governing system for the spacetime and matter evolution.
  • domain assumption Existence of stable, equilibrated boson-star solutions for the chosen potentials
    Required to construct initial data that remain constraint-satisfying during evolution.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5438 in / 1325 out tokens · 37464 ms · 2026-05-10T18:41:39.176728+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Boson star-black hole binaries: initial data and head-on collisions

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A one-body conformal-factor correction stabilizes boson star-black hole initial data, enabling gravitational-wave analysis that shows higher multipoles can discriminate mixed mergers from pure black-hole binaries.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

106 extracted references · 82 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 11 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    B. P. Abbottet al., Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. X9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019

  3. [3]

    GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the Second Part of the Third Observing Run

    R. Abbottet al.(KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientific), Phys. Rev. X13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr- qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog with Observations from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Observing Run

    T. L. S. Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, and the KAGRA Collaboration, “Gwtc-4.0: Updating the gravitational-wave transient catalog with observations from the first part of the fourth ligo-virgo-kagra observ- ing run,” (2025), arXiv:2508.18082 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    The Science of the Einstein Telescope

    A. Abacet al., “The science of the einstein telescope,” (2025), arXiv:2503.12263 [gr-qc]. 16 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 t/M 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 N/N(0) Mini ˆλ = 100 σ0 = 0.15 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 t/M □0.2 0.0 0.2 h22 0.0 0.1 0.2 Mf 10□3 10□2 10□1 100 Mf |˜h22(Mf )| FIG. 14.Top:Fraction of the non-accreted Noether charge over ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Evans, A

    M. Evanset al., (2023), arXiv:2306.13745 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

    P. Amaro-Seoaneet al., “Laser interferometer space an- tenna,” (2017), arXiv:1702.00786 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), (2021), arXiv:2112.06861 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021

  9. [9]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), Astro- phys. J. Lett.875, L1 (2019), arXiv:1906.11238 [astro- ph.GA]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Milky Way

    K. Akiyamaet al.(Event Horizon Telescope), Astro- phys. J. Lett.930, L12 (2022), arXiv:2311.08680 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022

  11. [11]

    Measuring the ringdown scalar polarization of gravitational waves in Einstein-scalar-Gauss-Bonnet gravity,

    T. Evstafyeva, M. Agathos, and J. L. Ripley, Phys. Rev. D107, 124010 (2023), arXiv:2212.11359 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Testing General Relativity with Present and Future Astrophysical Observations

    E. Bertiet al., CQG32, 243001 (2015), arXiv:1501.07274 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2015

  13. [13]

    Numerical binary black hole mergers in dynamical Chern-Simons: I. Scalar field

    M. Okounkova, L. C. Stein, M. A. Scheel, and D. A. Hemberger, Phys. Rev. D96, 044020 (2017), arXiv:1705.07924 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  14. [14]

    Black holes and binary mergers in scalar Gauss-Bonnet gravity: scalar field dynamics

    H. Witek, L. Gualtieri, P. Pani, and T. P. Sotiriou, Phys. Rev. D99, 064035 (2019), arXiv:1810.05177 [gr- qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    Sperhake, C

    U. Sperhake, C. J. Moore, R. Rosca, M. Agathos, D. Gerosa, and C. D. Ott, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 201103 (2017), arXiv:1708.03651 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  16. [16]

    C. A. Herdeiro, A. M. Pombo, E. Radu, P. V. Cunha, and N. Sanchis-Gual, Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics2021, 051 (2021)

    2021

  17. [17]

    The imitation game reloaded: effective shadows of dynamically robust spinning Proca stars,

    I. Sengo, P. V. P. Cunha, C. A. R. Herdeiro, and E. Radu, “The imitation game reloaded: effective shad- ows of dynamically robust spinning proca stars,” (2024), arXiv:2402.14919 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Polarimetry imprints of exotic compact objects: Solitonic boson stars,

    J. L. Rosa, N. Aimar, and H. L. Tamm, “Polarime- try imprints of exotic compact objects: solitonic boson stars,” (2025), arXiv:2504.02472 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    J. L. Synge, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.131, 463 (1966)

    1966

  20. [20]

    Nonlinear Treatment of a Black Hole Mimicker Ringdown,

    N. Siemonsen, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 031401 (2024), arXiv:2404.14536 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Geodesic stability, Lyapunov exponents and quasinormal modes,

    V. Cardoso, A. S. Miranda, E. Berti, H. Witek, and V. T. Zanchin, Phys. Rev. D79, 064016 (2009), arXiv:0812.1806 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2009

  22. [22]

    Y. Koga, N. Asaka, M. Kimura, and K. Okabayashi, Phys. Rev. D105, 104040 (2022), arXiv:2202.00201 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    S. H. V¨ olkel, N. Franchini, E. Barausse, and E. Berti, Phys. Rev. D106, 124036 (2022), arXiv:2209.10564 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    Light rings as observational evidence for event horizons: long-lived modes, ergoregions and nonlinear instabilities of ultracompact objects

    V. Cardoso, L. C. B. Crispino, C. F. B. Macedo, H. Okawa, and P. Pani, Phys. Rev. D90, 044069 (2014), arXiv:1406.5510 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  25. [25]

    G. A. Marks, S. J. Staelens, T. Evstafyeva, and U. Sperhake, Physical Review Letters135(2025), 10.1103/lk48-7r2f

    work page doi:10.1103/lk48-7r2f 2025

  26. [26]

    S. J. Staelens, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 3177, 012046 (2026)

    2026

  27. [27]

    Assessing the stability of ultracompact spinning boson stars with nonlinear evolutions,

    T. Evstafyeva, N. Siemonsen, and W. E. East, Phys. Rev. D113, 044024 (2026), arXiv:2508.11527 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    D. J. Kaup, Phys. Rev.172, 1331 (1968)

    1968

  29. [29]

    Ruffini and S

    R. Ruffini and S. Bonazzola, Phys. Rev.187, 1767 (1969)

    1969

  30. [30]

    S. L. Liebling and C. Palenzuela, Living Reviews in Rel- ativity26(2023), 10.1007/s41114-023-00043-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s41114-023-00043-4 2023

  31. [31]

    Palenzuela, P

    C. Palenzuela, P. Pani, M. Bezares, V. Cardoso, L. Lehner, and S. Liebling, Physical Review D96 (2017), 10.1103/physrevd.96.104058

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.104058 2017

  32. [32]

    Bezares, M

    M. Bezares, M. Boˇ skovi´ c, S. Liebling, C. Palenzuela, P. Pani, and E. Barausse, Physical Review D105 (2022), 10.1103/physrevd.105.064067

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.064067 2022

  33. [33]

    Helfer, U

    T. Helfer, U. Sperhake, R. Croft, M. Radia, B.-X. Ge, and E. A. Lim, Classical and Quantum Gravity39, 074001 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    Sanchis-Gual, J

    N. Sanchis-Gual, J. C. Bustillo, C. Herdeiro, E. Radu, J. A. Font, S. H. Leong, and A. Torres-Forn´ e, Physical Review D106(2022), 10.1103/physrevd.106.124011

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.124011 2022

  35. [35]

    Evstafyeva, U

    T. Evstafyeva, U. Sperhake, T. Helfer, R. Croft, M. Ra- dia, B.-X. Ge, and E. A. Lim, Classical and Quantum Gravity40, 085009 (2023)

    2023

  36. [36]

    Siemonsen and W

    N. Siemonsen and W. E. East, Physical Review D108 (2023), 10.1103/physrevd.108.124015

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.124015 2023

  37. [37]

    B.-X. Ge, E. A. Lim, U. Sperhake, T. Evstafyeva, D. Cors, E. de Jong, R. Croft, and T. Helfer, Phys. Rev. D112, 124080 (2025), arXiv:2410.23839 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Evstafyeva, U

    T. Evstafyeva, U. Sperhake, I. Romero-Shaw, and M. Agathos, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 131401 (2024), arXiv:2406.02715 [gr-qc], arXiv:2406.02715 [gr-qc]. 17

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Pompili, E

    L. Pompili, E. Maggio, H. O. Silva, and A. Buonanno, Phys. Rev. D111, 124040 (2025), arXiv:2504.10130 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    D. F. Torres, S. Capozziello, and G. Lambiase, Phys. Rev. D62, 104012 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0004064

    work page arXiv 2000

  41. [41]

    F. S. Guzman, Phys. Rev. D73, 021501 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0512081

    work page arXiv 2006

  42. [42]

    Amaro-Seoane, J

    P. Amaro-Seoane, J. Barranco, A. Bernal, and L. Rez- zolla, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2010, 002–002 (2010)

    2010

  43. [44]

    J. L. Rosa and D. Rubiera-Garcia, Physical Review D 106(2022), 10.1103/physrevd.106.084004

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.084004 2022

  44. [46]

    Sin, Physical Review D50, 3650–3654 (1994)

    S.-J. Sin, Physical Review D50, 3650–3654 (1994)

    1994

  45. [47]

    Schive, T

    H.-Y. Schive, T. Chiueh, and T. Broadhurst, Nature Physics10, 496–499 (2014)

    2014

  46. [48]

    Palenzuela, I

    C. Palenzuela, I. Olabarrieta, L. Lehner, and S. L. Liebling, Phys. Rev. D75, 064005 (2007), gr- qc/0612067

    work page arXiv 2007

  47. [49]

    Orbital Dynamics of Binary Boson Star Systems,

    C. Palenzuela, L. Lehner, and S. L. Liebling, Phys. Rev. D77, 044036 (2008), arXiv:0706.2435 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2008

  48. [50]

    Evstafyeva, U

    T. Evstafyeva, U. Sperhake, T. Helfer, R. Croft, M. Ra- dia, B.-X. Ge, and E. A. Lim, Class. Quant. Grav.40, 085009 (2023), arXiv:2212.08023 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  49. [51]

    Damour, T

    T. Damour, T. Jain, and U. Sperhake, “Gravitational scattering of solitonic boson stars: Analytics vs numer- ics,” (2025), arXiv:2512.00945 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [52]

    Brito, V

    R. Brito, V. Cardoso, C. A. Herdeiro, and E. Radu, Physics Letters B752, 291–295 (2016)

    2016

  51. [53]

    Alcubierre, J

    M. Alcubierre, J. Barranco, A. Bernal, J. C. Degol- lado, A. Diez-Tejedor, M. Megevand, D. Nunez, and O. Sarbach, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 19LT01 (2018), arXiv:1805.11488 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2018

  52. [54]

    M. D. Duez, F. Foucart, L. E. Kidder, C. D. Ott, and S. A. Teukolsky, Class. Quant. Grav.27, 114106 (2010), arXiv:0912.3528 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2010

  53. [55]

    Kyutoku, M

    K. Kyutoku, M. Shibata, and K. Taniguchi, Physical Review D82, 044049 (2010), arXiv:1008.1460 [astro- ph]

    work page arXiv 2010

  54. [56]

    Cardoso, T

    V. Cardoso, T. Ikeda, Z. Zhong, and M. Zilh˜ ao, Physi- cal Review D106(2022), 10.1103/physrevd.106.044030

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.044030 2022

  55. [57]

    Zhong, V

    Z. Zhong, V. Cardoso, T. Ikeda, and M. Zilh˜ ao, Physi- cal Review D108(2023), 10.1103/physrevd.108.084051

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.084051 2023

  56. [58]

    Clough, T

    K. Clough, T. Dietrich, and J. C. Niemeyer, Phys. Rev. D98, 083020 (2018)

    2018

  57. [59]

    Bezares and C

    M. Bezares and C. Palenzuela, Classical and Quantum Gravity35, 234002 (2018)

    2018

  58. [60]

    Legacy of boson clouds on black hole binaries,

    G. M. Tomaselli, T. F. M. Spieksma, and G. Bertone, “Legacy of boson clouds on black hole binaries,” (2024), arXiv:2407.12908 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [62]

    Baumann, H

    D. Baumann, H. S. Chia, J. Stout, and L. t. Haar, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2019, 006–006 (2019)

    2019

  60. [63]

    Nonlinear stability of rotating hairy black holes,

    J. A. Carretero, P. Grandcl´ ement, C. Palenzuela, and M. Salgado, “Nonlinear stability of rotating hairy black holes,” (2025), arXiv:2510.19825 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [64]

    Splitting the Gravitational Atom: Instabilities of Black Holes with Synchronized or Resonant Hair

    J. Nicoules, J. Ferreira, C. A. R. Herdeiro, E. Radu, and M. Zilh˜ ao, “Splitting the gravitational atom: Instabil- ities of black holes with synchronized/resonant hair,” (2025), arXiv:2509.20450 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  62. [65]

    Evstafyeva, R

    T. Evstafyeva, R. Rosca-Mead, U. Sperhake, and B. Bruegmann, Phys. Rev. D108, 104064 (2023), arXiv:2310.05200 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  63. [66]

    Kain, Phys

    B. Kain, Phys. Rev. D103, 123003 (2021), arXiv:2106.01740 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  64. [67]

    R. C. Tolman, Phys. Rev.55, 364 (1939)

    1939

  65. [68]

    J. R. Oppenheimer and G. M. Volkoff, Phys. Rev.55, 374 (1939)

    1939

  66. [69]

    Gleiser, Phys

    M. Gleiser, Phys. Rev. D38, 2376 (1988), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 39, 1257 (1989)]

    1988

  67. [70]

    Gleiser and R

    M. Gleiser and R. Watkins, Nucl. Phys. B319, 733 (1989)

    1989

  68. [71]

    N. M. Santos, C. L. Benone, and C. A. R. Herdeiro, JCAP06, 068 (2024), arXiv:2404.07257 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  69. [72]

    S. H. Hawley and M. W. Choptuik, Physical Review D 62(2000), 10.1103/physrevd.62.104024

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.62.104024 2000

  70. [73]

    Jim´ enez-V´ azquez and M

    E. Jim´ enez-V´ azquez and M. Alcubierre, Physical Re- view D106(2022), 10.1103/physrevd.106.044071

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.044071 2022

  71. [74]

    Boson stars ind≥4 dimensions: Stability, oscillation frequencies, and dy- namical evolutions,

    G. A. Marks and A. A. Zaif, “Boson stars ind≥4 dimensions: Stability, oscillation frequencies, and dy- namical evolutions,” (2025), arXiv:2510.13988 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  72. [75]

    L. G. Collodel and D. D. Doneva, Phys. Rev. D106, 084057 (2022), arXiv:2203.08203 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  73. [76]

    GRChombo: An adaptable numerical relativity code for fundamental physics,

    T. Andradeet al., J. Open Source Softw.6, 3703 (2021), arXiv:2201.03458 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  74. [77]

    Radia, U

    M. Radia, U. Sperhake, A. Drew, K. Clough, P. Figueras, E. A. Lim, J. L. Ripley, J. C. Aurrekoetxea, T. Fran¸ ca, and T. Helfer, Class. Quant. Grav.39, 135006 (2022), arXiv:2112.10567 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  75. [78]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. D59, 024007 (1998), gr-qc/9810065

    work page Pith review arXiv 1998

  76. [79]

    Shibata and T

    M. Shibata and T. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. D52, 5428 (1995)

    1995

  77. [80]

    D. Alic, C. Bona-Casas, C. Bona, L. Rezzolla, and C. Palenzuela, Phys. Rev. D85, 064040 (2012), arXiv:1106.2254 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2012

  78. [81]

    Arnowitt, S

    R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, inGravitation an introduction to current research, edited by L. Witten (John Wiley, New York, 1962) pp. 227–265, arXiv:gr- qc/0405109

    work page arXiv 1962

  79. [82]

    Croft, T

    R. Croft, T. Helfer, B.-X. Ge, M. Radia, T. Evstafyeva, E. A. Lim, U. Sperhake, and K. Clough, Class. Quant. Grav.40, 065001 (2023), arXiv:2207.05690 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  80. [83]

    Croft, Class

    R. Croft, Class. Quant. Grav.40, 105007 (2023), arXiv:2203.13845 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

Showing first 80 references.