pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.14270 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-15 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE· astro-ph.IM

Recognition: unknown

Fast neural network surrogate for multimodal effective-one-body gravitational waveforms from generically precessing compact binaries

Christopher Whittall , Geraint Pratten
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 12:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HEastro-ph.IM
keywords gravitational waveformssurrogate modelsneural networksprecessing binariesbinary black holeseffective-one-bodyparameter estimation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A neural network surrogate reproduces accurate waveforms from precessing black hole binaries up to mass ratios of 1:10 while running far faster than the base model.

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

The paper constructs a machine learning model that quickly generates the gravitational wave signals produced when black holes merge with misaligned spins. Detailed models that capture the full effects of precession are accurate but too slow for repeated use in large-scale data analysis. The authors train a neural network on outputs from the existing SEOBNRv5PHM model to create a surrogate version that covers quasicircular systems with mass ratios up to 1:10 and arbitrary spin directions. Tests confirm that the surrogate stays faithful to the original model, and it has been used successfully to recover source parameters from both real gravitational wave events and simulated injections. This resolves part of the conflict between physical realism and the need for computational speed in gravitational wave astronomy.

Core claim

The central claim is that SEOBNRv5PHM_NNSur7dq10, a reduced-order neural network surrogate of the SEOBNRv5PHM waveform model, accurately represents the multimodal gravitational waveforms from generically precessing quasicircular binary black hole systems with mass ratios up to 1:10 and arbitrary spin magnitudes and orientations. The surrogate has been validated for faithfulness against the base model and has been applied to Bayesian parameter inference on both real and injected gravitational wave data, delivering speedups of roughly five times on CPUs for single evaluations and nearly 1000 times per waveform when amortized over large GPU batches.

What carries the argument

The reduced-order neural network surrogate, which learns to map binary parameters directly to the full multimodal waveform output of the effective-one-body model.

If this is right

  • Single waveforms can be generated approximately five times faster on CPUs than with the base SEOBNRv5PHM model.
  • When evaluating large batches on GPUs the per-waveform cost drops by nearly 1000 times.
  • The surrogate supports full Bayesian parameter estimation on real and injected gravitational wave data without detectable bias.
  • The same reduced-order neural network approach can be applied to extend coverage of other precessing waveform models.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The speed gains could enable real-time or near-real-time analysis of gravitational wave alerts from future detectors.
  • The same training strategy might be adapted to waveform models that include eccentricity or higher-order modes.
  • Population studies that require thousands of waveform evaluations become feasible with this level of acceleration.
  • Similar neural surrogates could reduce computational barriers in related areas such as neutron-star merger modeling.

Load-bearing premise

The neural network trained on SEOBNRv5PHM outputs can faithfully reproduce the multimodal structure of generically precessing waveforms across the full parameter space without introducing systematic biases that affect downstream parameter estimation.

What would settle it

A direct comparison of posterior distributions recovered from the same set of injected signals using both the surrogate and the original SEOBNRv5PHM model that shows statistically significant differences in recovered masses, spins, or distances would demonstrate that the surrogate introduces unacceptable errors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.14270 by Christopher Whittall, Geraint Pratten.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Real part of the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Components of the quaternion [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. An example multi-layer perceptron with 7 inputs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Training history for the orbital phase network, show [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: illustrates the waveform generation process. In the P-frame module, the individual surrogate models for the orbital phase and each R-frame mode are com￾puted sequentially for the given intrinsic parameters ⃗λ, and then combined to give each of the (m ≥ 0) P-frame modes h P ℓm(t; ⃗λ) on Tcom. The qJ2P (t) module likewise evaluates the surrogate model for each component of qJ2P and returns these quantities o… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Detector frame threshold masses as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. SNR-weighted, ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Mismatches between the surrogate and SEOB [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Average wall time per waveform as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Recovered posterior distributions for all parameters for injection 1. All mass quantities are given in the detector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. As Fig. 12 but for Injection 2. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Selected intrinsic and extrinsic parameter corner plots for GW150914, comparing the surrogate to SEOBNRv5PHM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Distribution of times taken to evaluate the likeli [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. As Fig. 14 but for GW200129 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. As Fig. 14 but for GW250114 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. Plot of the SNR-weighted, ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. Scatter plot of the values of the 1000 largest aLIGO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20. SNR-weighted, ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_20.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Gravitational waveform templates are a key ingredient for the detection and characterization of gravitational waves emitted by compact binary mergers in the universe. These templates must be physically accurate and extensive, but also highly computationally efficient, two requirements that are often in tension. One solution to this problem is the development of surrogate models, which are fast, data-driven models trained to predict the output of a slower, physically realistic waveform model. In this article we build on existing work to incorporate machine learning techniques into the conventional reduced order surrogate framework, with a focus on extending coverage to waveform models that describe generically precessing quasicircular binaries. In particular, we present SEOBNRv5PHM_NNSur7dq10, a reduced order neural network surrogate of the SEOBNRv5PHM waveform model, valid up to mass ratios 1:10 for precessing quasicircular binary black hole systems with arbitrary spin magnitudes and orientations. The faithfulness of the surrogate to SEOBNRv5PHM is validated, and the surrogate is successfully applied to Bayesian parameter inference using both real and injected gravitational wave data. The surrogate is approximately 5 times faster than SEOBNRv5PHM when evaluating a single waveform on a CPU, and nearly 1000 times faster per-waveform when amortizing the cost over large waveform batches on a GPU.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents SEOBNRv5PHM_NNSur7dq10, a reduced-order neural-network surrogate trained on the SEOBNRv5PHM effective-one-body waveform model. The surrogate targets generically precessing quasicircular binary black hole systems with mass ratios up to 1:10 and arbitrary spin magnitudes and orientations. It claims to faithfully reproduce the multimodal structure of the parent model, reports validation of this faithfulness, and demonstrates successful application to Bayesian parameter estimation on both real and injected gravitational-wave data. Computational speedups of approximately 5x on CPU for single waveforms and nearly 1000x on GPU for batched evaluations are stated.

Significance. If the faithfulness validation and absence of systematic biases hold across the claimed domain, the work supplies a practical, high-speed waveform model that relaxes the computational cost of detailed EOB templates for precessing systems. This is directly relevant to large-scale parameter estimation campaigns and could support broader exploration of precession effects in current and future detectors. The combination of reduced-order modeling with neural networks, together with explicit demonstration on real and injected data, constitutes a concrete advance; credit is given for grounding the surrogate in an independent physical model rather than self-referential training.

major comments (1)
  1. The central claim of sufficient faithfulness for downstream inference rests on the validation results. The manuscript should report quantitative mismatch statistics (mean, median, and worst-case values) as functions of mass ratio, spin magnitude, and precession angle, with explicit separation of higher-mode contributions, to allow readers to judge whether residual errors remain below the threshold that would bias parameter recovery at the level of current detector sensitivities.
minor comments (2)
  1. Abstract: the reported GPU speedup is given without specifying batch size or hardware; adding these details would make the performance claim reproducible.
  2. The surrogate name SEOBNRv5PHM_NNSur7dq10 is introduced without an explicit statement of the training-set boundaries (e.g., exact spin and inclination ranges) in the abstract; a one-sentence clarification would improve immediate readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript and for the recommendation of minor revision. We address the single major comment below and agree to strengthen the validation presentation accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of sufficient faithfulness for downstream inference rests on the validation results. The manuscript should report quantitative mismatch statistics (mean, median, and worst-case values) as functions of mass ratio, spin magnitude, and precession angle, with explicit separation of higher-mode contributions, to allow readers to judge whether residual errors remain below the threshold that would bias parameter recovery at the level of current detector sensitivities.

    Authors: We agree that a more granular presentation of the mismatch statistics would improve transparency and help readers evaluate performance across the full domain. The current manuscript already reports overall faithfulness metrics, confirms that the surrogate reproduces the multimodal structure of SEOBNRv5PHM, and demonstrates unbiased parameter recovery on both injected and real data. To address the referee's request, we will revise the validation section to include tables (or supplementary figures) that tabulate mean, median, and worst-case mismatches as functions of mass ratio, spin magnitude, and precession angle. We will also provide separate statistics isolating the (2,2) mode from higher-mode contributions. These additions will make explicit that residual errors lie below thresholds relevant for current detector sensitivities and will not introduce systematic biases in inference. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; surrogate trained on independent external model

full rationale

The paper constructs SEOBNRv5PHM_NNSur7dq10 as a neural-network reduced-order surrogate trained directly on outputs from the independent SEOBNRv5PHM effective-one-body waveform model. The central claims of faithfulness and applicability to Bayesian inference rest on explicit validation by direct comparison to that external model plus application to real/injected data, with no derivation step that reduces by construction to a self-defined quantity, a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or a load-bearing self-citation chain. Prior surrogate literature is cited for methodology but does not supply the new results on precessing multimodal coverage up to q=10.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on abstract only; full training details would reveal more free parameters such as basis sizes in reduced order modeling and NN architecture choices.

free parameters (1)
  • Neural network weights and biases
    Trained to match SEOBNRv5PHM outputs; many parameters fitted during training.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption SEOBNRv5PHM provides an accurate representation of the gravitational waveforms from precessing binaries.
    The surrogate aims to replicate this model.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5545 in / 1368 out tokens · 55273 ms · 2026-05-10T12:32:57.696148+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

128 extracted references · 98 canonical work pages · 14 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Dependence on intrinsic parameters In this section we explore how the mismatch be- tween our surrogate and SEOBNRv5PHM depends on the intrinsic parameters ⃗λ= (q,|⃗ χ1|, θ1, ϕ1,|⃗ χ2|, θ2, ϕ2), considering as a particular example the SNR-weighted, (ι, ϕ0, ψ)-averaged mismatches using the aLIGO PSD il- lustrated in Fig. 7. Figure 18 displays the same mis- ...

  2. [2]

    IV B we evaluated the faithfulness of our sur- rogate model to SEOBNRv5PHM, using the CPU ver- sion of our model without quaternion downsampling as the reference configuration

    Equivalence of different model configurations In Sec. IV B we evaluated the faithfulness of our sur- rogate model to SEOBNRv5PHM, using the CPU ver- sion of our model without quaternion downsampling as the reference configuration. In this appendix, we confirm that different configurations of our surrogate model pro- duce consistent results with one anothe...

    2000

  3. [3]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Obser- vation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KA- GRA), GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog 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 arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    org/plan/(2026), last updated 13 February 2026

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration, LIGO, Virgo and KAGRA Observing Run Plans,https://observing.docs.ligo. org/plan/(2026), last updated 13 February 2026

    2026

  6. [6]

    Punturoet al., The Einstein Telescope: A third-generation gravitational wave observatory, Class

    M. Punturoet al., The Einstein Telescope: A third-generation gravitational wave observatory, Class. Quant. Grav.27, 194002 (2010)

    2010

  7. [7]

    Branchesi et al., JCAP07, 068 (2023), arXiv:2303.15923 [gr-qc]

    M. Branchesiet al., Science with the Einstein Tele- scope: a comparison of different designs, JCAP07, 068, arXiv:2303.15923 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  8. [8]

    The Science of the Einstein Telescope

    A. Abacet al.(ET), The Science of the Einstein Tele- scope (2025), arXiv:2503.12263 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO

    D. Reitzeet al., Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribu- tion to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO, Bull. Am. Astron. Soc.51, 035 (2019), arXiv:1907.04833 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    Evans, A

    M. Evanset al., Cosmic Explorer: A Submission to the NSF MPSAC ngGW Subcommittee (2023), arXiv:2306.13745 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2023

  11. [11]

    LISA Definition Study Report

    M. Colpiet al.(LISA), LISA Definition Study Report (2024), arXiv:2402.07571 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    T. A. Apostolatos, C. Cutler, G. J. Sussman, and K. S. Thorne, Spin induced orbital precession and its mod- ulation of the gravitational wave forms from merging binaries, Phys. Rev. D49, 6274 (1994)

    1994

  13. [13]

    Vecchio, LISA observations of rapidly spinning mas- sive black hole binary systems, Phys

    A. Vecchio, LISA observations of rapidly spinning mas- sive black hole binary systems, Phys. Rev. D70, 042001 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0304051

    work page arXiv 2004

  14. [14]

    Chatziioannou, N

    K. Chatziioannou, N. Cornish, A. Klein, and N. Yunes, Spin-Precession: Breaking the Black Hole–Neutron Star Degeneracy, Astrophys. J. Lett.798, L17 (2015), arXiv:1402.3581 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  15. [15]

    Pratten, P

    G. Pratten, P. Schmidt, R. Buscicchio, and L. M. Thomas, Measuring precession in asymmetric com- pact binaries, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043096 (2020), arXiv:2006.16153 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

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

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021

  17. [17]

    J. E. Thompson, E. Hamilton, L. London, S. Ghosh, P. Kolitsidou, C. Hoy, and M. Hannam, PhenomXO4a: a phenomenological gravitational-wave model for pre- cessing black-hole binaries with higher multipoles and asymmetries, Phys. Rev. D109, 063012 (2024), arXiv:2312.10025 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    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]

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

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    S. E. Field, C. R. Galley, F. Herrmann, J. S. Hes- thaven, E. Ochsner, and M. Tiglio, Reduced basis cata- logs for gravitational wave templates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 221102 (2011), arXiv:1101.3765 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  20. [20]

    S. E. Field, C. R. Galley, J. S. Hesthaven, J. Kaye, and M. 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]

    P¨ urrer, Frequency domain reduced order models for gravitational waves from aligned-spin compact binaries, Class

    M. P¨ urrer, Frequency domain reduced order models for gravitational waves from aligned-spin compact binaries, Class. Quant. Grav.31, 195010 (2014), arXiv:1402.4146 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  22. [22]

    Blackman, S

    J. Blackman, S. E. Field, C. R. Galley, B. Szil´ agyi, M. A. Scheel, M. Tiglio, and D. A. Hemberger, Fast and Accurate Prediction of Numerical Relativity Wave- forms from Binary Black Hole Coalescences Using Sur- rogate Models, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 121102 (2015), arXiv:1502.07758 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    A Surrogate Model of Gravitational Waveforms from Numerical Relativity Simulations of Precessing Binary Black Hole Mergers

    J. Blackman, S. E. Field, M. A. Scheel, C. R. Gal- ley, D. A. Hemberger, P. Schmidt, and R. Smith, A Surrogate Model of Gravitational Waveforms from Numerical Relativity Simulations of Precessing Binary Black Hole Mergers, Phys. Rev. D95, 104023 (2017), arXiv:1701.00550 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  24. [24]

    C. R. Galley and P. Schmidt, Fast and efficient evalua- tion of gravitational waveforms via reduced-order spline interpolation (2016), arXiv:1611.07529 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  25. [25]

    Surrogate mod- els for precessing binary black hole simulations with unequal masses,

    V. Varma, S. E. Field, M. A. Scheel, J. Blackman, D. Gerosa, L. C. Stein, L. E. Kidder, and H. P. Pfeiffer, Surrogate models for precessing binary black hole sim- ulations with unequal masses, Phys. Rev. Research.1, 033015 (2019), arXiv:1905.09300 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  26. [26]

    N. J. Cornish, Fast Fisher Matrices and Lazy Likeli- hoods (2010), arXiv:1007.4820 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2010

  27. [27]

    Zackay, L

    B. Zackay, L. Dai, and T. Venumadhav, Relative Bin- ning and Fast Likelihood Evaluation for Gravitational Wave Parameter Estimation (2018), arXiv:1806.08792 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2018

  28. [28]

    Leslie, L

    N. Leslie, L. Dai, and G. Pratten, Mode-by-mode rel- ative binning: Fast likelihood estimation for gravita- tional waveforms with spin-orbit precession and mul- tiple harmonics, Phys. Rev. D104, 123030 (2021), arXiv:2109.09872 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2021

  29. [29]

    Vinciguerra, J

    S. Vinciguerra, J. Veitch, and I. Mandel, Accelerat- ing gravitational wave parameter estimation with multi- band template interpolation, Class. Quant. Grav.34, 115006 (2017), arXiv:1703.02062 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  30. [30]

    Morisaki, Accelerating parameter estimation of grav- itational waves from compact binary coalescence us- ing adaptive frequency resolutions, Phys

    S. Morisaki, Accelerating parameter estimation of grav- itational waves from compact binary coalescence us- ing adaptive frequency resolutions, Phys. Rev. D104, 044062 (2021), arXiv:2104.07813 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    Canizares, S

    P. Canizares, S. E. Field, J. R. Gair, and M. Tiglio, Gravitational wave parameter estimation with com- pressed likelihood evaluations, Phys. Rev. D87, 124005 (2013), arXiv:1304.0462 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  32. [32]

    Canizares, S

    P. Canizares, S. E. Field, J. Gair, V. Raymond, R. Smith, and M. Tiglio, Accelerated gravitational-wave parameter estimation with reduced order modeling, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 071104 (2015), arXiv:1404.6284 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  33. [33]

    Smith, S

    R. Smith, S. E. Field, K. Blackburn, C.-J. Haster, M. P¨ urrer, V. Raymond, and P. Schmidt, Fast and ac- curate inference on gravitational waves from precess- 34 ing compact binaries, Phys. Rev. D94, 044031 (2016), arXiv:1604.08253 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  34. [34]

    Tissino, G

    J. Tissino, G. Carullo, M. Breschi, R. Gamba, S. Schmidt, and S. Bernuzzi, Combining effective-one- body accuracy and reduced-order-quadrature speed for binary neutron star merger parameter estimation with machine learning, Phys. Rev. D107, 084037 (2023), arXiv:2210.15684 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    A. J. K. Chua and M. Vallisneri, Learning Bayesian posteriors with neural networks for gravitational- wave inference, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 041102 (2020), arXiv:1909.05966 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    M. Dax, S. R. Green, J. Gair, J. H. Macke, A. Buo- nanno, and B. Sch¨ olkopf, Real-Time Gravitational Wave Science with Neural Posterior Estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 241103 (2021), arXiv:2106.12594 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  37. [37]

    M. Dax, S. R. Green, J. Gair, N. Gupte, M. P¨ urrer, V. Raymond, J. Wildberger, J. H. Macke, A. Buonanno, and B. Sch¨ olkopf, Real-time inference for binary neutron star mergers using machine learning, Nature639, 49 (2025), arXiv:2407.09602 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Q. Hu, J. Irwin, Q. Sun, C. Messenger, L. Suleiman, I. S. Heng, and J. Veitch, Decoding Long-duration Gravitational Waves from Binary Neutron Stars with Machine Learning: Parameter Estimation and Equa- tions of State, Astrophys. J. Lett.987, L17 (2025), arXiv:2412.03454 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Hu, Hierarchical Subtraction with Neural Density Estimators as a General Solution to Overlapping Grav- itational Wave Signals (2025), arXiv:2507.05209 [gr-qc]

    Q. Hu, Hierarchical Subtraction with Neural Density Estimators as a General Solution to Overlapping Grav- itational Wave Signals (2025), arXiv:2507.05209 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Ramos-Buades, A

    A. Ramos-Buades, A. Buonanno, H. Estell´ es, M. Khalil, D. P. Mihaylov, S. Ossokine, L. Pompili, and M. Shiferaw, Next generation of accurate and ef- ficient 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

  41. [41]

    Barrault, Y

    M. Barrault, Y. Maday, N. C. Nguyen, and A. T. Pa- tera, An ‘empirical interpolation’ method: application to efficient reduced-basis discretization of partial differ- ential equations, Comptes Rendus Mathematique339, 667 (2004)

    2004

  42. [42]

    Maday, N

    Y. Maday, N. C. Nguyen, A. T. Patera, and S. Pau, A general multipurpose interpolation procedure: the magic points, Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis8, 383 (2009)

    2009

  43. [43]

    A. J. K. Chua, C. R. Galley, and M. Vallisneri, Reduced- order modeling with artificial neurons for gravitational- wave inference, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 211101 (2019), arXiv:1811.05491 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2019

  44. [44]

    Khan and R

    S. Khan and R. Green, Gravitational-wave surrogate models powered by artificial neural networks, Phys. Rev. D103, 064015 (2021), arXiv:2008.12932 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    L. M. Thomas, G. Pratten, and P. Schmidt, Accelerat- ing multimodal gravitational waveforms from precessing compact binaries with artificial neural networks, Phys. Rev. D106, 104029 (2022), arXiv:2205.14066 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  46. [46]

    Fragkouli, P

    S.-C. Fragkouli, P. Nousi, N. Passalis, P. Iosif, N. Ster- gioulas, and A. Tefas, Deep residual error and bag- of-tricks learning for gravitational wave surrogate modeling, Appl. Soft Comput.147, 110746 (2023), arXiv:2203.08434 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    Gramaxo Freitas, A

    O. Gramaxo Freitas, A. Theodoropoulos, N. Villanueva, T. Fernandes, S. Nunes, J. A. Font, A. Onofre, A. Torres-Forn´ e, and J. D. Martin-Guerrero, Deep learning powered numerical relativity surrogate for bi- nary black hole waveforms, Phys. Rev. D112, 043026 (2025), arXiv:2412.06946 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    L. E. Kidder, Coalescing binary systems of compact ob- jects to postNewtonian 5/2 order. 5. Spin effects, Phys. Rev. D52, 821 (1995), arXiv:gr-qc/9506022

    work page Pith review arXiv 1995

  49. [49]

    Schmidt, I

    P. Schmidt, I. W. Harry, and H. P. Pfeiffer, Nu- merical Relativity Injection Infrastructure (2017), arXiv:1703.01076 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  50. [50]

    Tracking the precession of compact binaries from their gravitational-wave signal

    P. Schmidt, M. Hannam, S. Husa, and P. Ajith, Tracking the precession of compact binaries from their gravitational-wave signal, Phys. Rev. D84, 024046 (2011), arXiv:1012.2879 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

  51. [51]

    Towards models of gravitational waveforms from generic binaries: A simple approximate mapping between precessing and non-precessing inspiral signals

    P. Schmidt, M. Hannam, and S. Husa, Towards mod- els of gravitational waveforms from generic binaries: A simple approximate mapping between precessing and non-precessing inspiral signals, Phys. Rev. D86, 104063 (2012), arXiv:1207.3088 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  52. [52]

    Boyle, R

    M. Boyle, R. Owen, and H. P. Pfeiffer, A geometric approach to the precession of compact binaries, Phys. Rev. D84, 124011 (2011), arXiv:1110.2965 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  53. [53]

    D. P. Mihaylov, S. Ossokine, A. Buonanno, H. Es- telles, L. Pompili, M. P¨ urrer, and A. Ramos-Buades, pySEOBNR: a software package for the next generation of effective-one-body multipolar waveform models, Soft- wareX30, 102080 (2025), arXiv:2303.18203 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Boyle, L

    M. Boyle, L. E. Kidder, S. Ossokine, and H. P. Pfeif- fer, Gravitational-wave modes from precessing black- hole binaries, arXiv:1409.4431 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  55. [55]

    Ramos-Buades, P

    A. Ramos-Buades, P. Schmidt, G. Pratten, and S. Husa, Validity of common modeling approximations for pre- cessing binary black holes with higher-order modes, Phys. Rev. D101, 103014 (2020), arXiv:2001.10936 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  56. [56]

    Estell ´es, A

    H. Estell´ es, A. Buonanno, R. Enficiaud, C. Foo, and L. Pompili, Adding equatorial-asymmetric effects for spin-precessing binaries into the SEOBNRv5PHM waveform model (2025), arXiv:2506.19911 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    K. S. Thorne, Multipole Expansions of Gravitational Radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys.52, 299 (1980)

    1980

  58. [58]

    O’Shaughnessy, B

    R. O’Shaughnessy, B. Vaishnav, J. Healy, Z. Meeks, and D. Shoemaker, Efficient asymptotic frame selection for binary black hole spacetimes using asymptotic radia- tion, Phys. Rev. D84, 124002 (2011), arXiv:1109.5224 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  59. [59]

    Boyle, Angular velocity of gravitational radiation from precessing binaries and the corotating frame, Phys

    M. Boyle, Angular velocity of gravitational radiation from precessing binaries and the corotating frame, Phys. Rev. D87, 104006 (2013), arXiv:1302.2919 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  60. [60]

    L. N. Trefethen and I. Bau, David,Numerical Linear Algebra, illustrated ed., Other Titles in Applied Math- ematics, Vol. 50 (SIAM, 1997) p. 373

    1997

  61. [61]

    C. J. Moore, C. P. L. Berry, A. J. K. Chua, and J. R. Gair, Improving gravitational-wave parameter estima- tion using Gaussian process regression, Phys. Rev. D 93, 064001 (2016), arXiv:1509.04066 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  62. [62]

    High-accuracy mass, spin, and recoil predictions of generic black-hole merger remnants

    V. Varma, D. Gerosa, L. C. Stein, F. H´ ebert, and H. 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 Pith review arXiv 2019

  63. [63]

    Williams, I

    D. Williams, I. S. Heng, J. Gair, J. A. Clark, and B. Khamesra, Precessing numerical relativity waveform surrogate model for binary black holes: A Gaussian process regression approach, Phys. Rev. D101, 063011 (2020), arXiv:1903.09204 [gr-qc]. 35

    work page arXiv 2020

  64. [64]

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

    T. Islam, V. Varma, J. Lodman, S. E. Field, G. Khanna, M. A. Scheel, H. P. Pfeiffer, D. Gerosa, and L. E. Kid- der, Eccentric binary black hole surrogate models for the gravitational waveform and remnant properties: compa- rable mass, nonspinning case, Phys. Rev. D103, 064022 (2021), arXiv:2101.11798 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  65. [65]

    L. M. Thomas, K. Chatziioannou, V. Varma, and S. E. Field, Optimizing neural network surrogate models: Ap- plication to black hole merger remnants, Phys. Rev. D 111, 104029 (2025), arXiv:2501.16462 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    Bergstra, R

    J. Bergstra, R. Bardenet, Y. Bengio, and B. K´ egl, Algo- rithms for hyper-parameter optimization, inAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 24, edited by J. Shawe-Taylor, R. Zemel, P. Bartlett, F. Pereira, and K. Weinberger (Curran Associates, Inc., 2011)

    2011

  67. [67]

    Bergstra, D

    J. Bergstra, D. Yamins, and D. Cox, Making a science of model search: Hyperparameter optimization in hun- dreds of dimensions for vision architectures, inProceed- ings of the 30th International Conference on Machine Learning, Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 28 (PMLR, 2013) pp. 115–123

    2013

  68. [68]

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration, LVK Algorithm Library - LALSuite, Free software (GPL) (2018)

    2018

  69. [69]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational- wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA, Living Rev. Rel.19, 1 (2016), arXiv:1304.0670 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  70. [70]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific), Exploring the Sensitivity of Next Generation Gravitational Wave Detectors, Class. Quant. Grav.34, 044001 (2017), arXiv:1607.08697 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2017

  71. [71]

    B. J. Owen and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Matched filter- ing of gravitational waves from inspiraling compact bi- naries: Computational cost and template placement, Phys. Rev. D60, 022002 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9808076

    work page arXiv 1999

  72. [72]

    A. Nitz, I. Harry, D. Brown, C. M. Biwer, J. Willis, T. D. Canton, C. Capano, T. Dent, L. Pekowsky, G. S. C. Davies, S. De, M. Cabero, S. Wu, A. R. Williamson, B. Machenschalk, D. Macleod, F. Pan- narale, P. Kumar, S. Reyes, dfinstad, S. Kumar, M. T´ apai, L. Singer, P. Kumar, veronica villa, max- trevor, B. U. V. Gadre, S. Khan, S. Fairhurst, and A. Toll...

    2024

  73. [73]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Pe- terson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, ˙I. Polat, Y. Feng, E. W. Moore, J. VanderPlas, D. Laxalde, J. Perktold, R. Cimrman, I. Henrik...

    2020

  74. [74]

    Harry, S

    I. Harry, S. Privitera, A. Boh´ e, and A. Buonanno, Searching for Gravitational Waves from Compact Bi- naries with Precessing Spins, Phys. Rev. D94, 024012 (2016), arXiv:1603.02444 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  75. [75]

    Lindblom, B

    L. Lindblom, B. J. Owen, and D. A. Brown, Model Waveform Accuracy Standards for Gravitational Wave Data Analysis, Phys. Rev. D78, 124020 (2008), arXiv:0809.3844 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2008

  76. [76]

    S. T. McWilliams, B. J. Kelly, and J. G. Baker, Observ- ing mergers of non-spinning black-hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D82, 024014 (2010), arXiv:1004.0961 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2010

  77. [77]

    Hannam, S

    M. Hannam, S. Husa, F. Ohme, and P. Ajith, Length requirements for numerical-relativity waveforms, Phys. Rev. D82, 124052 (2010), arXiv:1008.2961 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2010

  78. [78]

    Baird, S

    E. Baird, S. Fairhurst, M. Hannam, and P. Mur- phy, Degeneracy between mass and spin in black-hole- binary waveforms, Phys. Rev. D87, 024035 (2013), arXiv:1211.0546 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  79. [79]

    Constructing Gravitational Waves from Generic Spin-Precessing Compact Binary Inspirals

    K. Chatziioannou, A. Klein, N. Yunes, and N. Cornish, Constructing Gravitational Waves from Generic Spin- Precessing Compact Binary Inspirals, Phys. Rev. D95, 104004 (2017), arXiv:1703.03967 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  80. [80]

    Toubiana and J

    A. Toubiana and J. R. Gair, Indistinguishability cri- terion and estimating the presence of biases (2024), arXiv:2401.06845 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

Showing first 80 references.