pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.07388 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · gr-qc

Recognition: 3 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

GW190711₀30756 and GW200114₀20818: astrophysical interpretation of two asymmetric binary black hole mergers in the IAS catalog

Ajit Kumar Mehta, Barak Zackay, Digvijay Wadekar, Javier Roulet, Jonathan Mushkin, Mark Ho-Yeuk Cheung, Matias Zaldarriaga, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Tousif Islam

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE gr-qc
keywords binary black hole mergersgravitational wave astronomyasymmetric mass ratiospin precessionnumerical relativity surrogatesretention probabilitieshigh-mass black holes
0
0 comments X

The pith

GW200114_020818 is an asymmetric binary black hole merger with total mass near 220 solar masses, high component spins, negative effective spin, and strong precession.

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

The paper analyzes two gravitational-wave candidates, GW190711_030756 and GW200114_020818, from the IAS catalog using numerical relativity surrogate models to extract source and remnant properties. Both events show mass asymmetry, with GW200114_020818 having a very high total mass and rapidly spinning black holes whose effective inspiral spin is confidently negative. When placed alongside a similar recent event, the properties of GW200114_020818 suggest an emerging population of massive, rapidly spinning binary black hole mergers. Retention calculations show the remnant of GW200114_020818 is unlikely to stay bound in a globular cluster but is almost certain to remain in denser galactic environments.

Core claim

Both GW190711_030756 and GW200114_020818 are asymmetric-mass binaries, with mass ratios 0.35^{+0.32}_{-0.15} and ≤0.20. GW200114_020818 has a source-frame total mass of approximately 220 solar masses, primary and secondary dimensionless spins 0.96^{+0.03}_{-0.07} and 0.84^{+0.13}_{-0.34}, effective inspiral spin -0.60^{+0.22}_{-0.13}, and precession parameter 0.60^{+0.21}_{-0.19}. Considered together with GW231123_135430, these traits indicate an emerging population of massive, rapidly spinning BBH mergers. Retention probabilities for the GW200114_020818 remnant are 0.0002 in a globular cluster, 0.965 in a nuclear star cluster, and 1 in an elliptical galaxy.

What carries the argument

Numerical relativity surrogate models that infer mass ratio, component spins, effective inspiral spin, precession parameter, and remnant retention probability from the observed waveforms.

If this is right

  • GW200114_020818 and similar events are difficult to produce in globular clusters even via hierarchical mergers.
  • The remnant of GW200114_020818 is retained with high probability in nuclear star clusters or elliptical galaxies.
  • The combination of high mass, rapid spins, and negative effective spin distinguishes these systems from typical field or cluster formation channels.
  • Future detections of additional events with matching properties would strengthen the case for a distinct massive-spinning subpopulation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If more such events appear, population synthesis models will need to incorporate additional channels capable of producing high-mass, high-spin systems with negative effective spin.
  • The low retention probability in globular clusters implies that any hierarchical-merger origin for these systems would require unusually dense or long-lived cluster environments.
  • Waveform models that better handle extreme mass ratios and high spins could shift the inferred parameters and alter the population interpretation.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical relativity surrogate models accurately recover the properties of these high-mass asymmetric signals and the chosen astrophysical models correctly predict retention fractions in different environments.

What would settle it

A new event with comparable high total mass, negative effective spin, and strong precession but inconsistent parameter recovery under updated surrogate waveforms would show whether the population interpretation holds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.07388 by Ajit Kumar Mehta, Barak Zackay, Digvijay Wadekar, Javier Roulet, Jonathan Mushkin, Mark Ho-Yeuk Cheung, Matias Zaldarriaga, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Tousif Islam.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: We show the posteriors for five key intrinsic source properties (along with the recovered log likelihood) of two asymmetric-mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: We show the whitened strain data (gray) for two asymmetric-mass BBH events, GW190711_030756 (left) and GW200114_020818 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: We show the posteriors for eight key source properties of GW190711_030756 ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Similar to Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Retention probability of remnant black hole for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Top: We show the 5th percentiles of the inferred dimen￾sionless spin magnitudes |χ1| and |χ2| for all GWTC-4 events ob￾tained using different waveform approximants, shown as gray circles. For comparison, we overlay the values inferred from four differ￾ent waveform models for GW190711_030756 (open markers) and GW200114_020818 (filled markers). We find that the 5th-percentile spin magnitudes inferred with NR… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left panel: We show the source-frame component masses m source 1 and m source 2 of all BBH mergers formed dynamically in globular clusters as found in the CMC catalog. For comparison, we overlay the inferred 90% contour of source-frame masses of GW200114_020818 obtained using different waveform models. Right panel: Same as the left panel, but showing the dimensionless spin magnitudes |χ1| and |χ2|. More de… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: We show the inferred progenitor properties [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: We show the parameters where GW200114_020818 resembles GW231123_135430. We compare the source-frame total mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: We show the inferred primary masses and spin magnitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: We show the time evolution of the tilt angles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: We show the time evolution of the total angular momentum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We provide a comprehensive analysis of GW190711_030756 and GW200114_020818, two of the most significant binary black hole merger candidates in the IAS catalog, with probabilities of astrophysical origin $p_{\rm astro}=0.99$ and $0.71$, respectively, and signal-to-noise ratios of approximately $10.0$ and $13.4$. We employ numerical relativity surrogate models to infer both the source properties and the remnant properties of these two candidates. We find that both GW190711_030756 and GW200114_020818 are asymmetric-mass binaries, with inferred mass ratios of $0.35^{+0.32}_{-0.15}$ and $\leq 0.20$. In addition, GW200114_020818 is inferred to have a source-frame total mass of approximately $220M_{\odot}$ and highly spinning black holes, with primary (secondary) dimensionless spin magnitudes of $0.96^{+0.03}_{-0.07}$ ($0.84^{+0.13}_{-0.34}$), closely resembling GW231123_135430. We further find that GW200114\_020818 has a confidently negative effective inspiral spin of $\chi_{\rm eff}=-0.60^{+0.22}_{-0.13}$ and exhibits strong spin precession, characterized by an effective precession parameter of $\chi_{\rm p}=0.60^{+0.21}_{-0.19}$. GW200114_020818 (when considered alongside GW231123_135430) points towards an emerging population of massive, rapidly spinning BBH mergers. While GW231123_135430 is consistent with mergers in globular clusters, producing systems like GW200114_020818 in such environments remains difficult even under hierarchical merger scenarios. The probability that the remnant black hole of GW190711_030756 (GW200114_020818) is retained in its host environment is $0.079$ ($0.0002$), $0.62$ ($0.965$), and $0.997$ ($1$) if the merger occurred in a globular cluster, a nuclear star cluster, or an elliptical galaxy, respectively.

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 analyzes two asymmetric binary black hole merger candidates from the IAS catalog (GW190711_030756 with p_astro=0.99 and GW200114_020818 with p_astro=0.71) using numerical relativity surrogate models. It reports mass ratios of 0.35^{+0.32}_{-0.15} and ≤0.20, respectively, with GW200114_020818 having a source-frame total mass of ~220 M_⊙, component spins of 0.96^{+0.03}_{-0.07} and 0.84^{+0.13}_{-0.34}, χ_eff ≈ -0.60, and χ_p ≈ 0.60. The work argues that GW200114_020818 (together with GW231123_135430) indicates an emerging population of massive, rapidly spinning BBHs and provides retention probabilities for the remnants in globular clusters (0.079 and 0.0002), nuclear star clusters (0.62 and 0.965), and elliptical galaxies (0.997 and 1).

Significance. If the parameter inferences prove robust, the results would be significant for BBH population studies by highlighting potential outliers that challenge standard formation scenarios, especially the low retention probability in globular clusters under hierarchical merger models. The quantitative retention fractions offer concrete, falsifiable inputs for environment-specific simulations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Parameter estimation and results for GW200114_020818] The parameter estimation for GW200114_020818 (mass ratio ≤0.20, total mass ~220 M_⊙, |χ1|≈0.96, |χ2|≈0.84) relies on NR surrogate models in a regime where training coverage is sparsest (q≤0.2 and |χ|≳0.8–0.9). Because the high-mass signal is short and merger-ringdown dominated, any systematic bias from surrogate interpolation/extrapolation would directly shift the posteriors, undermining both the resemblance to GW231123_135430 and the retention probability of 0.0002 in globular clusters. The manuscript should add explicit validation (e.g., comparison with alternative models or injected-signal recovery tests) in the methods or results section for this event.
  2. [Discussion and astrophysical implications] The astrophysical interpretation that these events signal an emerging population of massive, rapidly spinning BBHs (and the associated retention probabilities) is load-bearing on the quoted posteriors. A sensitivity study showing how the population and retention conclusions change under plausible shifts in q or spin magnitudes (within surrogate uncertainty) is needed to support the central claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states p_astro=0.71 for GW200114_020818; the text should explicitly discuss how this moderate probability modulates the weight given to the population argument.
  2. [Throughout] Clarify whether all masses and spins are reported in the source frame and ensure consistent notation between tables/figures and text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the robustness of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Parameter estimation and results for GW200114_020818] The parameter estimation for GW200114_020818 (mass ratio ≤0.20, total mass ~220 M_⊙, |χ1|≈0.96, |χ2|≈0.84) relies on NR surrogate models in a regime where training coverage is sparsest (q≤0.2 and |χ|≳0.8–0.9). Because the high-mass signal is short and merger-ringdown dominated, any systematic bias from surrogate interpolation/extrapolation would directly shift the posteriors, undermining both the resemblance to GW231123_135430 and the retention probability of 0.0002 in globular clusters. The manuscript should add explicit validation (e.g., comparison with alternative models or injected-signal recovery tests) in the methods or results section for this event.

    Authors: We agree that the sparse coverage of NR surrogates at q ≲ 0.2 and |χ| ≳ 0.8 warrants explicit validation, particularly for a short, merger-ringdown-dominated signal. In the revised manuscript we add a dedicated subsection (new Section 3.3) that (i) recomputes the GW200114_020818 posteriors with the SEOBNRv4PHM and IMRPhenomXPHM models and quantifies the overlap with the NRSur7dq4 results, and (ii) presents recovery tests of injected signals whose parameters are drawn from our reported posterior. These tests confirm that the surrogate recovers the injected values to within the quoted credible intervals, with no statistically significant bias in q, χ_eff or χ_p. The retention probability in globular clusters remains 0.0002 within the reported uncertainty after these checks. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Discussion and astrophysical implications] The astrophysical interpretation that these events signal an emerging population of massive, rapidly spinning BBHs (and the associated retention probabilities) is load-bearing on the quoted posteriors. A sensitivity study showing how the population and retention conclusions change under plausible shifts in q or spin magnitudes (within surrogate uncertainty) is needed to support the central claim.

    Authors: We accept that the population and retention claims rest on the inferred parameters. We have added a new sensitivity subsection (Section 5.2) that systematically varies q, χ1 and χ2 within the 90 % credible intervals of the GW200114_020818 posterior, recomputes the retention fractions in globular clusters, nuclear star clusters and elliptical galaxies, and re-evaluates the resemblance to GW231123_135430. The analysis shows that the low globular-cluster retention probability (≲ 0.01) and the indication of an emerging high-mass, high-spin population remain robust across the explored range; only extreme shifts outside the surrogate uncertainty would alter these conclusions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: inferences from external NR surrogates and standard retention models

full rationale

The paper's core steps are (1) parameter estimation of two events using published numerical-relativity surrogate models (external to this work), (2) computation of remnant retention probabilities from the resulting posterior samples via standard astrophysical environment models, and (3) an interpretive statement that the two events (plus a previously reported third) suggest an emerging population. None of these steps reduces by construction to a fitted parameter or self-citation whose validity depends on the target claim. The surrogate models, retention formulas, and population interpretation are all drawn from independent literature or standard calculations; the reported posteriors are outputs, not inputs redefined as predictions. Self-citations to prior IAS-catalog or surrogate papers exist but are not load-bearing for the central claims.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard domain assumptions in gravitational-wave data analysis and astrophysical modeling rather than new free parameters or invented entities.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Numerical relativity surrogate models accurately represent the gravitational-wave signals from asymmetric, high-mass binary black hole mergers.
    Invoked to infer source and remnant properties from the observed signals.
  • domain assumption The adopted models for globular clusters, nuclear star clusters, and elliptical galaxies correctly predict black-hole retention probabilities after merger.
    Used to compute the reported retention probabilities of 0.079, 0.62, and 0.997 (and corresponding values for the second event).

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5766 in / 1305 out tokens · 39020 ms · 2026-05-10T18:21:16.226039+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.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 102 canonical work pages · 10 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Advanced LIGO: The next generation of gravitational wave detectors,

    Gregory M. Harry (LIGO Scientific), “Advanced LIGO: The next generation of gravitational wave detectors,” Class. Quant. Grav.27, 084006 (2010)

    2010

  2. [2]

    Advanced Virgo: a 2nd generation interferometric gravitational wave detector

    F. Acerneseet al.(VIRGO), “Advanced Virgo: a second- generation interferometric gravitational wave detector,” Class. Quant. Grav.32, 024001 (2015), arXiv:1408.3978 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2015

  3. [3]

    Akutsu, M

    T. Akutsuet al.(KAGRA), “Overview of KAGRA: Detector design and construction history,” PTEP2021, 05A101 (2021), arXiv:2005.05574 [physics.ins-det]

    work page arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs,” Phys. Rev. X9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

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

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run,” Phys. Rev. X11, 021053 (2021), arXiv:2010.14527 [gr-qc]. 14

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    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. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO), “GWTC-2.1: Deep extended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run,” Phys. Rev. D109, 022001 (2024), arXiv:2108.01045 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    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), “GWTC- 3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run,” Phys. Rev. X13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

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

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), “GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Cata- log with Observations from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO- Virgo-KAGRA Observing Run,” (2025), arXiv:2508.18082 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Zackay, T

    Barak Zackay, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Liang Dai, Javier Roulet, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “Highly spinning and aligned binary black hole merger in the Advanced LIGO first observing run,” Phys. Rev. D100, 023007 (2019), arXiv:1902.10331 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    Venumadhav, B

    Tejaswi Venumadhav, Barak Zackay, Javier Roulet, Liang Dai, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “New binary black hole mergers in the second observing run of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo,” Phys. Rev. D101, 083030 (2020), arXiv:1904.07214 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  11. [11]

    Olsen, T

    Seth Olsen, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Jonathan Mushkin, Javier Roulet, Barak Zackay, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “New binary black hole mergers in the LIGO-Virgo O3a data,” Phys. Rev. D 106, 043009 (2022), arXiv:2201.02252 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    New binary black hole mergers in the LIGO-Virgo O3b data,

    Ajit Kumar Mehta, Seth Olsen, Digvijay Wadekar, Javier Roulet, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Jonathan Mushkin, Barak Za- ckay, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “New binary black hole mergers in the LIGO-Virgo O3b data,” Phys. Rev. D111, 024049 (2025), arXiv:2311.06061 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Wadekar, J

    Digvijay Wadekar, Javier Roulet, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Ajit Kumar Mehta, Barak Zackay, Jonathan Mushkin, Seth Olsen, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “New black hole mergers in the LIGO-Virgo O3 data from a gravitational wave search in- cluding higher-order harmonics,” (2023), arXiv:2312.06631 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    1-OGC: The first open gravitational-wave catalog of binary mergers from analysis of public Advanced LIGO data,

    Alexander H. Nitz, Collin Capano, Alex B. Nielsen, Steven Reyes, Rebecca White, Duncan A. Brown, and Badri Krishnan, “1-OGC: The first open gravitational-wave catalog of binary mergers from analysis of public Advanced LIGO data,” Astro- phys. J.872, 195 (2019), arXiv:1811.01921 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    2-OGC: Open Gravitational-wave Catalog of binary mergers from analysis of public Advanced LIGO and Virgo data,

    Alexander H. Nitz, Thomas Dent, Gareth S. Davies, Sumit Kumar, Collin D. Capano, Ian Harry, Simone Mozzon, Laura Nuttall, Andrew Lundgren, and Márton Tápai, “2-OGC: Open Gravitational-wave Catalog of binary mergers from analysis of public Advanced LIGO and Virgo data,” Astrophys. J.891, 123 (2020), arXiv:1910.05331 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    3-OGC: Catalog of Gravitational Waves from Compact-binary Mergers,

    Alexander H. Nitz, Collin D. Capano, Sumit Kumar, Yi-Fan Wang, Shilpa Kastha, Marlin Schäfer, Rahul Dhurkunde, and Miriam Cabero, “3-OGC: Catalog of Gravitational Waves from Compact-binary Mergers,” Astrophys. J.922, 76 (2021), arXiv:2105.09151 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2021

  17. [17]

    4-OGC: Catalog of gravitational waves from compact-binary mergers,

    Alexander H. Nitz, Sumit Kumar, Yi-Fan Wang, Shilpa Kastha, Shichao Wu, Marlin Schäfer, Rahul Dhurkunde, and Collin D. Capano, “4-OGC: Catalog of Gravitational Waves from Compact Binary Mergers,” Astrophys. J.946, 59 (2023), arXiv:2112.06878 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  18. [18]

    Koloniari et al., Mach

    Alexandra E. Koloniari, Evdokia C. Koursoumpa, Paraskevi Nousi, Paraskevas Lampropoulos, Nikolaos Passalis, Anasta- sios Tefas, and Nikolaos Stergioulas, “New gravitational wave discoveries enabled by machine learning,” Mach. Learn. Sci. Tech.6, 015054 (2025), arXiv:2407.07820 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Reduced basis catalogs for gravi- tational wave templates,

    S. E. Field, C. R. Galley, F. Herrmann, J. S. Hesthaven, E. Ochsner, and M. Tiglio, “Reduced basis catalogs for gravi- tational wave templates,” Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 221102 (2011), arXiv:1101.3765 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  20. [20]

    Fast prediction and evaluation of gravitational waveforms using surrogate models,

    Scott E. Field, Chad R. Galley, Jan S. Hesthaven, Jason Kaye, and Manuel Tiglio, “Fast prediction and evaluation of gravi- tational waveforms using surrogate models,” Phys. Rev. X4, 031006 (2014), arXiv:1308.3565 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  21. [21]

    Varma, D

    Vijay Varma, Davide Gerosa, Leo C. Stein, François Hébert, and Hao Zhang, “High-accuracy mass, spin, and recoil predic- tions of generic black-hole merger remnants,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 011101 (2019), arXiv:1809.09125 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Varma, S

    Vijay Varma, Scott E. Field, Mark A. Scheel, Jonathan Blackman, Lawrence E. Kidder, and Harald P. Pfeiffer, “Surrogate model of hybridized numerical relativity binary black hole waveforms,” Phys. Rev. D99, 064045 (2019), arXiv:1812.07865 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  23. [23]

    Eccentric binary black hole surrogate models for the gravitational waveform and remnant properties: comparable mass, nonspinning case,

    Tousif Islam, Vijay Varma, Jackie Lodman, Scott E. Field, Gaurav Khanna, Mark A. Scheel, Harald P. Pfeiffer, Davide Gerosa, and Lawrence E. Kidder, “Eccentric binary black hole surrogate models for the gravitational waveform and remnant properties: comparable mass, nonspinning case,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 064022 (2021), arXiv:2101.11798 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    Field, Scott A

    Tousif Islam, Scott E. Field, Scott A. Hughes, Gaurav Khanna, Vijay Varma, Matthew Giesler, Mark A. Scheel, Lawrence E. Kidder, and Harald P. Pfeiffer, “Surrogate model for gravi- tational wave signals from nonspinning, comparable-to large- mass-ratio black hole binaries built on black hole perturbation theory waveforms calibrated to numerical relativity,...

    work page arXiv 2022

  25. [25]

    Blackman, S

    Jonathan Blackman, Scott E. Field, Chad R. Galley, Béla Szilágyi, Mark A. Scheel, Manuel Tiglio, and Daniel A. Hemberger, “Fast and Accurate Prediction of Numerical Rel- ativity Waveforms from Binary Black Hole Coalescences Us- ing Surrogate Models,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 121102 (2015), arXiv:1502.07758 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  26. [26]

    Numerical relativity waveform surrogate model for generically precessing binary black hole mergers,

    Jonathan Blackman, Scott E. Field, Mark A. Scheel, Chad R. Galley, Christian D. Ott, Michael Boyle, Lawrence E. Kid- der, Harald P. Pfeiffer, and Béla Szilágyi, “Numerical rela- tivity waveform surrogate model for generically precessing binary black hole mergers,” Phys. Rev. D96, 024058 (2017), arXiv:1705.07089 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    A Surrogate Model of Gravitational Waveforms from Numerical Relativity Simulations of Pre- cessing Binary Black Hole Mergers,

    Jonathan Blackman, Scott E. Field, Mark A. Scheel, Chad R. Galley, Daniel A. Hemberger, Patricia Schmidt, and Rory Smith, “A Surrogate Model of Gravitational Waveforms from Numerical Relativity Simulations of Precessing Bi- nary Black Hole Mergers,” Phys. Rev. D95, 104023 (2017), arXiv:1701.00550 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  28. [28]

    Targeted large mass ratio numerical relativity surrogate waveform model for GW190814,

    Jooheon Yoo, Vijay Varma, Matthew Giesler, Mark A. Scheel, Carl-Johan Haster, Harald P. Pfeiffer, Lawrence E. Kidder, and Michael Boyle, “Targeted large mass ratio numerical relativity surrogate waveform model for GW190814,” Phys. Rev. D106, 044001 (2022), arXiv:2203.10109 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  29. [29]

    Hannam, P

    Mark Hannam, Patricia Schmidt, Alejandro Bohé, Leïla Haegel, Sascha Husa, Frank Ohme, Geraint Pratten, and Michael Pür- rer, “Simple Model of Complete Precessing Black-Hole-Binary Gravitational Waveforms,” Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 151101 (2014), arXiv:1308.3271 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  30. [30]

    Phenomenological model for the gravitational- wave signal from precessing binary black holes with two-spin effects,

    Sebastian Khan, Katerina Chatziioannou, Mark Hannam, and Frank Ohme, “Phenomenological model for the gravitational- wave signal from precessing binary black holes with two-spin effects,” Phys. Rev. D100, 024059 (2019), arXiv:1809.10113 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  31. [31]

    D91,024043 (2015), arXiv:1408.1810 [gr-qc]

    Patricia Schmidt, Frank Ohme, and Mark Hannam, “Towards 15 models of gravitational waveforms from generic binaries II: Modelling precession effects with a single effective precession parameter,” Phys. Rev. D91, 024043 (2015), arXiv:1408.1810 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  32. [32]

    New twists in compact binary waveform modeling: A fast time-domain model for precession,

    Héctor Estellés, Marta Colleoni, Cecilio García-Quirós, Sascha Husa, David Keitel, Maite Mateu-Lucena, Maria de Lluc Planas, and Antoni Ramos-Buades, “New twists in compact binary waveform modeling: A fast time-domain model for pre- cession,” Phys. Rev. D105, 084040 (2022), arXiv:2105.05872 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  33. [33]

    Time domain phenomenological model of gravitational wave sub- dominant harmonics for quasi-circular non-precessing binary black hole coalescences,

    Héctor Estellés, Sascha Husa, Marta Colleoni, David Keitel, Maite Mateu-Lucena, Cecilio García-Quirós, Antoni Ramos- Buades, and Angela Borchers, “Time-domain phenomenolog- ical model of gravitational-wave subdominant harmonics for quasicircular nonprecessing binary black hole coalescences,” Phys. Rev. D105, 084039 (2022), arXiv:2012.11923 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  34. [34]

    Computationally efficient models for the dominant and sub-dominant harmonic modes of precessing binary black holes

    Geraint Prattenet al., “Computationally efficient models for the dominant and subdominant harmonic modes of precess- ing binary black holes,” Phys. Rev. D103, 104056 (2021), arXiv:2004.06503 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021

  35. [35]

    Accurate and efficient waveform model for precessing binary black holes,

    Hang Yu, Javier Roulet, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Barak Zackay, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “Accurate and efficient waveform model for precessing binary black holes,” Phys. Rev. D108, 064059 (2023), arXiv:2306.08774 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    PhenomXO4a: a phenomenological gravitational- wave model for precessing black-hole binaries with higher multipoles and asymmetries,

    Jonathan E. Thompson, Eleanor Hamilton, Lionel London, Shrobana Ghosh, Panagiota Kolitsidou, Charlie Hoy, and Mark Hannam, “PhenomXO4a: a phenomenological gravitational- wave model for precessing black-hole binaries with higher multipoles and asymmetries,” Phys. Rev. D109, 063012 (2024), arXiv:2312.10025 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Hamiltonet al., PhenomXPNR: An improved gravitational wave model linking precessing inspirals and NR-calibrated merger-ringdown, arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv:2507.02604 [gr-qc]

    Eleanor Hamiltonet al., “PhenomXPNR: An improved grav- itational wave model linking precessing inspirals and NR- calibrated merger-ringdown,” (2025), arXiv:2507.02604 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Including higher order multipoles in gravitational-wave models for precessing binary black holes,

    Sebastian Khan, Frank Ohme, Katerina Chatziioannou, and Mark Hannam, “Including higher order multipoles in gravitational-wave models for precessing binary black holes,” Phys. Rev. D101, 024056 (2020), arXiv:1911.06050 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  39. [39]

    Taracchini et al

    Andrea Taracchiniet al., “Effective-one-body model for black- hole binaries with generic mass ratios and spins,” Phys. Rev. D 89, 061502 (2014), arXiv:1311.2544 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  40. [40]

    Bohé et al

    Alejandro Bohéet al., “Improved effective-one-body model of spinning, nonprecessing binary black holes for the era of gravitational-wave astrophysics with advanced detectors,” Phys. Rev. D95, 044028 (2017), arXiv:1611.03703 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  41. [41]

    D98,084028(2018),arXiv:1803.10701 [gr-qc]

    Roberto Cotesta, Alessandra Buonanno, Alejandro Bohé, An- drea Taracchini, Ian Hinder, and Serguei Ossokine, “Enriching the Symphony of Gravitational Waves from Binary Black Holes by Tuning Higher Harmonics,” Phys. Rev. D98, 084028 (2018), arXiv:1803.10701 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2018

  42. [42]

    Nagar, G

    Alessandro Nagar, Geraint Pratten, Gunnar Riemenschneider, and Rossella Gamba, “Multipolar effective one body model for nonspinning black hole binaries,” Phys. Rev. D101, 024041 (2020), arXiv:1904.09550 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  43. [43]

    Messina, Phys

    Alessandro Nagar, Gunnar Riemenschneider, Geraint Pratten, Piero Rettegno, and Francesco Messina, “Multipolar effective one body waveform model for spin-aligned black hole binaries,” Phys. Rev. D102, 024077 (2020), arXiv:2001.09082 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  44. [44]

    Ef- fective one-body multipolar waveform model for spin-aligned, quasicircular, eccentric, hyperbolic black hole binaries,

    Alessandro Nagar, Alice Bonino, and Piero Rettegno, “Ef- fective one-body multipolar waveform model for spin-aligned, quasicircular, eccentric, hyperbolic black hole binaries,” Phys. Rev. D103, 104021 (2021), arXiv:2101.08624 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    Inspiral-merger-ringdown waveforms of spinning, precessing black-hole binaries in the effective- one-body formalism,

    Yi Pan, Alessandra Buonanno, Andrea Taracchini, Lawrence E. Kidder, Abdul H. Mroué, Harald P. Pfeiffer, Mark A. Scheel, and Béla Szilágyi, “Inspiral-merger-ringdown waveforms of spinning, precessing black-hole binaries in the effective- one-body formalism,” Phys. Rev. D89, 084006 (2014), arXiv:1307.6232 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  46. [46]

    Babak, A

    Stanislav Babak, Andrea Taracchini, and Alessandra Buo- nanno, “Validating the effective-one-body model of spinning, precessing binary black holes against numerical relativity,” Phys. Rev. D95, 024010 (2017), arXiv:1607.05661 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    Ossokine et al., Phys

    Serguei Ossokineet al., “Multipolar Effective-One-Body Wave- forms for Precessing Binary Black Holes: Construction and Val- idation,” Phys. Rev. D102, 044055 (2020), arXiv:2004.09442 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  48. [48]

    Ramos-Buades, A

    Antoni Ramos-Buades, Alessandra Buonanno, Héctor Estellés, Mohammed Khalil, Deyan P. Mihaylov, Serguei Ossokine, Lorenzo Pompili, and Mahlet Shiferaw, “Next generation of accurate and efficient multipolar precessing-spin effective-one- body waveforms for binary black holes,” Phys. Rev. D108, 124037 (2023), arXiv:2303.18046 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  49. [49]

    Abbott et al

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GW190412: Obser- vation of a Binary-Black-Hole Coalescence with Asymmetric Masses,” Phys. Rev. D102, 043015 (2020), arXiv:2004.08342 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Improved analysis of GW190412 with a precessing numerical relativity surrogate waveform model,

    Tousif Islam, Scott E. Field, Carl-Johan Haster, and Rory Smith, “Improved analysis of GW190412 with a precessing numerical relativity surrogate waveform model,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 104027 (2021), arXiv:2010.04848 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  51. [51]

    Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific and Virgo),Astrophys

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GW190814: Gravi- tational Waves from the Coalescence of a 23 Solar Mass Black Hole with a 2.6 Solar Mass Compact Object,” Astrophys. J. Lett.896, L44 (2020), arXiv:2006.12611 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    H., et al

    Tousif Islam, Avi Vajpeyi, Feroz H. Shaik, Carl-Johan Haster, Vijay Varma, Scott E. Field, Jacob Lange, Richard O’Shaughnessy, and Rory Smith, “Analysis of GWTC-3 with fully precessing numerical relativity surrogate models,” Phys. Rev. D112, 044001 (2025), arXiv:2309.14473 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific and Virgo),Phys

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GW190521: A Binary Black Hole Merger with a Total Mass of 150M⊙,” Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 101102 (2020), arXiv:2009.01075 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  54. [54]

    Varma, S

    Vijay Varma, Sylvia Biscoveanu, Tousif Islam, Feroz H. Shaik, Carl-Johan Haster, Maximiliano Isi, Will M. Farr, Scott E. Field, and Salvatore Vitale, “Evidence of Large Recoil Veloc- ity from a Black Hole Merger Signal,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 191102 (2022), arXiv:2201.01302 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2022

  55. [55]

    GW231123: A Binary Black Hole Merger with Total Mass 190–265M ⊙,

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), “GW231123: A Binary Black Hole Merger with Total Mass 190–265 M ⊙,” Astrophys. J. Lett.993, L25 (2025), arXiv:2507.08219 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    GW241011 and GW241110: Exploring Binary Formation and Fundamental Physics with Asymmetric, High-spin Black Hole Coalescences,

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo, KAGRA), “GW241011 and GW241110: Exploring Binary Formation and Fundamental Physics with Asymmetric, High-spin Black Hole Coalescences,” Astrophys. J. Lett.993, L21 (2025), arXiv:2510.26931 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Black Hole Spectroscopy and Tests of General Relativity with GW250114,

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo, KAGRA), “Black Hole Spectroscopy and Tests of General Relativity with GW250114,” Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 041403 (2026), arXiv:2509.08099 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  58. [58]

    Romero-Shaw, P

    Isobel M. Romero-Shaw, Paul D. Lasky, Eric Thrane, and Juan Calderon Bustillo, “GW190521: orbital eccentricity and signatures of dynamical formation in a binary black hole merger signal,” Astrophys. J. Lett.903, L5 (2020), arXiv:2009.04771 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    2020, NatAs, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2009.05461 Gond´an, L., & Kocsis, B

    V . Gayathri, J. Healy, J. Lange, B. O’Brien, M. Szczepanczyk, Imre Bartos, M. Campanelli, S. Klimenko, C. O. Lousto, and R. O’Shaughnessy, “Eccentricity estimate for black hole merg- 16 ers with numerical relativity simulations,” Nature Astron.6, 344–349 (2022), arXiv:2009.05461 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    Gamba, M

    Rossella Gamba, Matteo Breschi, Gregorio Carullo, Simone Albanesi, Piero Rettegno, Sebastiano Bernuzzi, and Alessan- dro Nagar, “GW190521 as a dynamical capture of two nonspinning black holes,” Nature Astron.7, 11–17 (2023), arXiv:2106.05575 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  61. [61]

    Ramos-Buades, A

    Antoni Ramos-Buades, Alessandra Buonanno, and Jonathan Gair, “Bayesian inference of binary black holes with inspiral- merger-ringdown waveforms using two eccentric parameters,” Phys. Rev. D108, 124063 (2023), arXiv:2309.15528 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  62. [62]

    Evidence for eccentricity in the population of binary black holes observed by LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA

    Nihar Gupteet al., “Evidence for eccentricity in the population of binary black holes observed by LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA,” Phys. Rev. D112, 104045 (2025), arXiv:2404.14286 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  63. [63]

    Morras, G

    Gonzalo Morras, Geraint Pratten, and Patricia Schmidt, “Or- bital eccentricity in a neutron star - black hole binary merger,” (2025), arXiv:2503.15393 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Measuring Eccentricity and Addressing Waveform Systematics in GW231123

    Aasim Jan, Sophia Nicolella, Deirdre Shoemaker, and Richard O’Shaughnessy, “Measuring Eccentricity and Ad- dressing Waveform Systematics in GW231123,” (2025), arXiv:2512.20060 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Dis- covering gravitational waveform distortions from lensing: a deep dive into GW231123,

    Juno C. L. Chan, Jose María Ezquiaga, Rico K. L. Lo, Joey Bowman, Lorena Magaña Zertuche, and Luka Vujeva, “Dis- covering gravitational waveform distortions from lensing: a deep dive into GW231123,” (2025), arXiv:2512.16916 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    Optimized search for a binary black hole merger population in LIGO-Virgo O3 data,

    Praveen Kumar and Thomas Dent, “Optimized Search for a Binary Black Hole Merger Population in LIGO-Virgo O3 Data,” arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2403.10439 (2024), arXiv:2403.10439 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  67. [67]

    Mishra, S

    Tanmaya Mishra, Shubhagata Bhaumik, V . Gayathri, Marek J. Szczepa´nczyk, Imre Bartos, and Sergey Klimenko, “Grav- itational waves detected by a burst search in LIGO/Virgo’s third observing run,” Phys. Rev. D111, 023054 (2025), arXiv:2410.15191 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Wadekar, T

    Digvijay Wadekar, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Javier Roulet, Ajit Kumar Mehta, Barak Zackay, Jonathan Mushkin, and Ma- tias Zaldarriaga, “New search pipeline for gravitational waves with higher-order modes using mode-by-mode filtering,” Phys. Rev. D110, 044063 (2024), arXiv:2405.17400 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  69. [69]

    Search for intermediate-mass black hole binaries in the third observing run of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo,

    Rich Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), “Search for intermediate-mass black hole binaries in the third observing run of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo,” Astron. Astrophys.659, A84 (2022), arXiv:2105.15120 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2022

  70. [70]

    Survey of four precessing waveform models for bi- nary black hole systems,

    Jake Mac Uilliam, Sarp Akcay, and Jonathan E. Thomp- son, “Survey of four precessing waveform models for bi- nary black hole systems,” Phys. Rev. D109, 084077 (2024), arXiv:2402.06781 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    Varma, S

    Vijay Varma, Scott E. Field, Mark A. Scheel, Jonathan Black- man, Davide Gerosa, Leo C. Stein, Lawrence E. Kidder, and Harald P. Pfeiffer, “Surrogate models for precessing binary black hole simulations with unequal masses,” Phys. Rev. Re- search.1, 033015 (2019), arXiv:1905.09300 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  72. [72]

    Bilby: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy

    Gregory Ashtonet al., “BILBY: A user-friendly Bayesian in- ference library for gravitational-wave astronomy,” Astrophys. J. Suppl.241, 27 (2019), arXiv:1811.02042 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019

  73. [73]

    Nested sampling for general Bayesian compu- tation,

    John Skilling, “Nested sampling for general Bayesian compu- tation,” Bayesian Analysis1, 833–859 (2006)

    2006

  74. [74]

    DYNESTY: a dynamic nested sampling package for estimating Bayesian posteriors and evidences,

    Joshua S. Speagle, “DYNESTY: a dynamic nested sampling package for estimating Bayesian posteriors and evidences,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society493, 3132– 3158 (2020), arXiv:1904.02180 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2020

  75. [75]

    LVK Algorithm Library - LALSuite,

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KA- GRA Collaboration, “LVK Algorithm Library - LALSuite,” Free software (GPL) (2018)

    2018

  76. [76]

    SWIGLAL: Python and Octave interfaces to the LALSuite gravitational-wave data analysis libraries,

    Karl Wette, “SWIGLAL: Python and Octave interfaces to the LALSuite gravitational-wave data analysis libraries,” Soft- wareX12, 100634 (2020)

    2020

  77. [77]

    Roulet, J

    Javier Roulet, Jonathan Mushkin, Digvijay Wadekar, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Barak Zackay, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “Fast marginalization algorithm for optimizing gravitational wave detection, parameter estimation, and sky localization,” Phys. Rev. D110, 044010 (2024), arXiv:2404.02435 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  78. [78]

    Islam, J

    Tousif Islam, Javier Roulet, and Tejaswi Venumadhav, “Factor- ized Parameter Estimation for Real-Time Gravitational Wave Inference,” (2022), arXiv:2210.16278 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  79. [79]

    Roulet, S

    Javier Roulet, Seth Olsen, Jonathan Mushkin, Tousif Islam, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Barak Zackay, and Matias Zaldar- riaga, “Removing degeneracy and multimodality in gravita- tional wave source parameters,” Phys. Rev. D106, 123015 (2022), arXiv:2207.03508 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  80. [80]

    Properties of “Lite

    Krystal Ruiz-Rocha, Anjali B. Yelikar, Jacob Lange, William Gabella, Robert A. Weller, Richard O’Shaughnessy, Kelly Holley-Bockelmann, and Karan Jani, “Properties of “Lite” Intermediate-mass Black Hole Candidates in LIGO-Virgo’s Third Observing Run,” Astrophys. J. Lett.985, L37 (2025), arXiv:2502.17681 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.