Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

One-Loop Observables to Higher Order in Spin

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives one-loop formulas giving the momentum impulse and spin kick of spinning binaries directly from the eikonal phase, to any order in spin.

desk verdict Useful all-order-in-spin eikonal formulas from a genuinely new KMOC route, but the all-orders claim hangs on an explicitly bookkeeping replacement rule that is only checked to quadratic spin. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.02034 v2 pith:PNCDG5ZJ submitted 2024-12-02 hep-th gr-qc

Juan Pablo Gatica This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qc
keywords spinkickmomentumimpulseeikonalphaseKMOCformalismhigher-spinfieldssupplementaryconditionpost-Minkowskianexpansionclassicalscattering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper aims to show that at one loop, the second post-Minkowskian order for gravity, the momentum impulse and the spin kick of two classical spinning bodies can be computed directly from the eikonal phase, with no truncation in spin. The derivation is carried out in the KMOC formalism, which links scattering amplitudes to classical observables, using non-transverse massive spinning fields that do not impose the spin supplementary condition and only assuming the generic long-range structure of the amplitudes. The resulting formulas, Eqs. (4.20) and (5.22), express both observables through the eikonal phase and its derivatives; imposing the spin supplementary condition afterwards recovers the fixed-spin eikonal results, which the author verifies up to quadratic order in spin for gravity. A sympathetic reader should care because, if the claim holds, spin-dependent scattering at this order is encoded in a single phase and a short list of operations on it, rather than in separate amplitude calculations at each spin order.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the eikonal phase $\delta_{\text{cov}}(b_{\text{cov}}, u_1, u_2, S_1, S_2)$, together with the covariant impact parameter $b_{\text{cov}} = b - (\omega_1 - \omega_2)$ that absorbs the spin-dependent polarization phases. Non-transverse 'general-spin' fields give a trivial polarization completeness relation, and special kinematics plus horizontal-flip symmetry are used to discard classically-singular terms. Two projectors carry the conserved quantities: $\Pi^{\mu\nu}$ enforces the on-shell momentum transfer, and $\Sigma^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ \rho\sigma}$ preserves the spin-tensor magnitude while leaving the Lorentz algebra unchanged. The load-bearing step is the replacement rule $\int \not\!\!Dl\, e^{-ib_{\text{cov}}\cdot l} l^\gamma \frac{\partial}{\partial l^\alpha} A^{(1)}(l) \to 2\, \partial\delta^{(1)}_{\text{cov}}/\partial\Pi^{\alpha\gamma}$, which converts the cut-correction term, generated by expanding the on-shell delta functions in the two-particle cut, into a derivative of the eikonal phase with respect to the projector; imposing the SSC removes this term.

What would settle it

A direct computation of the one-loop momentum impulse or spin kick at cubic or quartic order in spin, for gravity or any long-range theory of non-transverse massive spinning fields, using full phase-space integration without the replacement rule Eq. (4.17), would settle the claim: if the result differs from Eqs. (4.20) and (5.22), the bookkeeping prescription is not generally valid and the formulas fail beyond the verified quadratic order.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated on the paper's own terms, is that Eqs. (4.20) and (5.22) give the one-loop $\mathcal{O}(G^2)$ momentum impulse and spin kick for arbitrary spin, expressed solely in terms of the eikonal phase, for any long-range scattering theory of non-transverse massive spinning fields, without imposing a spin supplementary condition. Both formulas follow the same pattern: the tree-level observable acting on the one-loop phase, minus an iterated commutator of the tree-level phase with the tree-level observable, minus a symmetrized product involving the tree-level momentum impulse and a derivative $\nabla^{\alpha}_{\text{pcm}}$ that respects the center-of-mass symmetry. The comparison for gravity, after imposing the SSC, agrees with the fixed-spin eikonal results of Ref. [141] up to quadratic order in spin, and the formulas satisfy momentum conservation and spin-tensor-magnitude conservation.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the replacement rule Eq. (4.17), which turns the cut-correction term into a derivative with respect to the momentum projector; the paper calls this a bookkeeping strategy rather than a derivation, and notes that applying the on-shell projector before differentiating would make the term vanish.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In any theory with the assumed long-range amplitude structure, the one-loop momentum impulse and spin kick are fixed by the tree-level and one-loop eikonal phases together with derivatives and commutators, so no other one-loop input is needed.
  • Imposing a spin supplementary condition after the calculation removes the cut-correction derivative terms, recovering the fixed-spin eikonal results and showing that the SSC-violating degrees of freedom decouple in the classical limit.
  • The projectors $\Pi^{\mu\nu}$ and $\Sigma^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ \rho\sigma}$ make momentum conservation and spin-tensor-magnitude conservation automatic at one loop, giving built-in checks for future applications.
  • Both observables obey the same Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff-style pattern, matching the form that would be produced by half-shift or translation-operator generation of higher-order corrections.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the derivation should transfer to non-gravitational long-range theories such as electromagnetic scattering of charged spinning bodies, since only the generic long-range amplitude structure is used; a direct computation there would be a cheap test of the formulas.
  • The author's hint that the cut-correction terms encode effects of the lower-spin states propagating in non-transverse fields could be checked by computing the spin-vector magnitude change at one loop and comparing it with the cut-correction contribution.
  • The common pattern behind Eqs. (4.20) and (5.22) suggests that all-order-in-spin one-loop observables might be generated by a translation operator acting on tree-level observables; making that operator explicit could yield a shorter derivation and a route toward two-loop iteration.
  • The replacement rule Eq. (4.17) is the main risk; because it is justified only as bookkeeping, testing the formulas at cubic or quartic order in spin in a model where Compton-amplitude exponentiation breaks down would map where the claim stops holding.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives one-loop (O(G^2)) eikonal-type formulas for the momentum impulse and spin kick of two massive spinning bodies in the KMOC formalism, using non-transverse ('general-spin') fields that do not satisfy a spin supplementary condition. The central results are Eq. (4.20) for the momentum impulse and Eq. (5.22) for the spin kick, expressed in terms of the covariant eikonal phase δ_cov and derivatives thereof, including a new 'cut-correction' term controlled by derivatives with respect to the projector Π^{μν}. The derivation decomposes the one-loop amplitude into real and imaginary parts and into iteration pieces, applies horizontal-flip symmetry to remove classically-singular contributions, and introduces the projector-derivative replacement rule Eq. (4.17) to resolve the cut-correction integral. The formulas are checked against Ref. [141] up to quadratic order in spin after imposing the SSC, and the paper verifies momentum conservation and spin-tensor-magnitude conservation.

Significance. If Eqs. (4.20) and (5.22) hold to all orders in spin, they provide a compact and theory-agnostic bridge between the eikonal phase and spinning observables, going beyond previous fixed-spin analyses and packaging SSC-violating effects into the operator ∇_pcm. The paper is clearly organized, the comparison with the independent benchmark of Ref. [141] up to quadratic order is a genuine check, and the explicit conservation-law checks strengthen the result. The main deficit is that the single new ingredient needed for the all-orders claim—the replacement rule Eq. (4.17)—is asserted rather than derived, and its domain of validity is not established beyond the quadratic-order comparison.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2, Eq. (4.17), Appendix C] The replacement rule Eq. (4.17) is not derived from the integral definition; it is prescribed. The paper itself calls it a 'bookkeeping strategy' (Sec. 4.2), and Appendix C verifies it only on a simplified projection of the tree-level ansatz, dropping terms proportional to u·b and absorbing Υ-dependent terms into an unspecified function f. Moreover, Sec. 4.2 notes that if the on-shell projector were applied before differentiating, the term would vanish. This shows that Eq. (4.17) is an independent assumption rather than a consequence of the on-shell δ-functions or of the amplitude ansatz. Since the ∇_pcm terms in Eqs. (4.20) and (5.22) are exactly those generated by Eq. (4.17), the central claim that the formulas hold to arbitrary order in spin is not established until this rule is independently justified.
  2. [§6 and Conclusion] The validation against Ref. [141] is explicitly restricted to quadratic order in spin, as the paper states in the Introduction and Conclusion. The cut-correction term, which is the new structure beyond previous results, first contributes at cubic and higher orders in spin; these are precisely the orders for which no independent benchmark is provided. Therefore the statement that the derivation is 'valid to any order in spin' overstates the evidence presented, unless an all-orders proof of Eq. (4.17) or an independent check at cubic order is supplied.
  3. [§3.1 and §4.2] The generality of the result is tied to the specific tree-level ansatz Eq. (3.2) and to the treatment of the polarization exponent in Eq. (3.3). The paper claims that the derivation is 'agnostic to the choice of theory', but it does not specify which properties of the amplitude beyond this ansatz are required for the replacement rule (4.17). Making the minimal assumptions explicit is important, because the validity of the projector-derivative rule may depend on them; currently the theory-agnostic claim is not fully quantified.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (4.19)] The term (∂δ_cov/∂(bcov)⊥)^2 is written without explicit index contractions; adding a comment on which Lorentz indices are contracted would improve readability.
  2. [§5.1, Eq. (5.7)] The triple equality for the spin projector is terse; making the summed and free indices explicit would help the reader verify the identity.
  3. [Appendix C, Eq. (C.2)] The condition u·b = 0 is used without noting that b here is the covariant impact parameter b_cov; a sentence clarifying this, and its consistency with the projector insertion, would prevent confusion.
  4. [Throughout] The manuscript contains several typos and typesetting artifacts (e.g., 'spinni ng', 'constatnt', inconsistent use of 'bcov' versus 'b_cov', and the unusual ✚✚D notation); a careful proofreading pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

All-orders eikonal formulas rest on a prescribed cut-correction replacement; low-spin content independently checked.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.2, Eq. (4.17); reapplied in Section 5.2, Eq. (5.19); Appendix C]
    "To eventually express Eq. (4.16) fully in terms of eikonal phases, we plug in the ansatz for the tree-level general-spin amplitude Eq. (3.2). After recognizing that the loop momentum derivative effectively replaces the projector Π^{μν} with other variables, we prescribe the following replacement rule ... We must emphasize that taking the derivative with respect to the projector is more of a bookkeeping strategy that arrives at the desired expression; ... We also emphasize that if we had taken the derivative with the on-shell projector already applied Eq. (4.16) would have vanished."

    The replacement (4.17) is not derived from the KMOC formula; it is prescribed so that the leftover ∂/∂l-integral in Eq. (4.16) becomes a derivative of δ^(1) with respect to the projector Π. The author explicitly calls this a 'bookkeeping strategy that arrives at the desired expression' and notes that applying the on-shell projector before differentiating would make the term vanish. Since Eqs. (4.20) and (5.22) inherit this term (through Eq. (5.19)), the all-orders-in-spin part of the claimed eikonal formulas is an input chosen to produce eikonal form, not a computed prediction. The quadratic-order comparison to Ref. [141] is a genuine independent check of the low-spin content, so this is only a partial circularity.

full rationale

Most of the derivation (real/virtual kernels, horizontal-flip symmetry, eikonal-phase translation) is self-contained and does not reduce to the claimed result. The tree-level and one-loop amplitude ansätze are explicit inputs, not disguised outputs. The only step with a circular flavor is Eq. (4.17), where a leftover loop-momentum-derivative integral is converted into ∂δ/∂Π by prescription; the final formulas' cut-correction terms are therefore partly constructed to have eikonal form. Because the author candidly labels this 'bookkeeping' and because the formulas are checked against the independent eikonal results of Ref. [141] up to quadratic order in spin, the low-order prediction has independent content. No load-bearing self-citation was found: Ref. [129] (author's prior work) is used as context, not as the justification for the central formulas. The unresolved issue is the unproven all-orders validity of the replacement rule, which is a correctness/rigor gap rather than a full identity between input and output. Hence score 3.

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

The central claim rests on a small set of assumptions about the structure of long-range amplitudes, the eikonal exponentiation, the completeness of non-transverse polarization tensors, the cancellation of classically singular terms via horizontal-flip symmetry, and the ad hoc cut-correction replacement rule. No free parameters are fitted. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The tree-level amplitude has the form Eq. (3.2): an exponential times q-tensors contracted with spin tensors and a generic tensor Υ, with leading Coulomb behavior and classical scaling.
    This ansatz restricts the long-range scattering amplitudes under consideration; used throughout Sections 4 and 5.
  • domain assumption Eikonal exponentiation Eq. (2.22) and the relations δ(1)=FT[A(1)], δ(2)=FT[Re A(2)] hold to all orders in spin.
    Taken from the eikonal literature, cited as Refs. [166-169]; used to define the eikonal phase.
  • domain assumption The non-transverse higher-spin fields satisfy the simple completeness relation Eq. (2.5), with polarization sums equal to Kronecker deltas.
    This is the key simplification of SSC-violating fields; it allows products of amplitudes to be manipulated without spin-s propagators.
  • domain assumption The classically-singular contributions cancel via horizontal-flip symmetry and parity arguments after shifting to special kinematics.
    Used in Eqs. (4.10), (4.13), (5.16) to discard terms; requires the integrand to be parity-odd under l -> q - l.
  • ad hoc to paper The cut-correction replacement rule Eq. (4.17), ∫ Dl e^{-ib l} lγ ∂/∂lα A(1)(l) → 2 ∂δ_cov/∂Π^{αγ}, is valid.
    Prescribed as a 'bookkeeping strategy' rather than derived; Appendix C provides only partial justification via the amplitude ansatz. This is the weakest step.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of One-Loop Observables to Higher Order in Spin." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PNCDG5ZJ

@misc{pith2026241202034,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: One-Loop Observables to Higher Order in Spin},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PNCDG5ZJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.02034}
}
abstract

We study observables in the scattering of classical, spinning objects using the KMOC formalism. In particular, we derive formulas to higher order in spin and one loop $\mathcal{O}(G^2)$ for the spin kick and momentum impulse. Our derivation method is agnostic to the choice of theory or special conditions, such as the spin supplementary condition (SSC); we only rely on the generic structure of long-range scattering amplitudes of non-transverse, massive spinning fields in the classical limit. We check these formulas for the case of gravity and agree with previous results from the eikonal formalism after imposing a SSC.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Gravitational Bremsstrahlung in Black-Hole Scattering at $\mathcal{O}(G^3)$: Quadratic-in-Spin Effects

    hep-th 2025-05 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    First computation of the O(G^3 S^2) momentum-space gravitational waveform for two scattering spinning black holes, plus the leading three-body spinning waveform.

  2. First Look at Quartic-in-Spin Binary Dynamics at Third Post-Minkowskian Order

    hep-th 2025-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The O(G^3) conservative and radiation-reaction classical observables for spinning black-hole scattering are extended to quartic order in spin, with all-order-in-spin radiation reaction beyond the aligned-spin limit.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

172 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [141]

    A. Luna, N. Moynihan, D. O’Connell, and A. Ross, Observables from the Spinning Eikonal , arXiv:2312.09960

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo Collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al., Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger , Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016), no. 6 061102, [arXiv:1602.03837]

    arXiv 2016

  3. [2]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo Collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al., GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral , Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017), no. 16 161101, [ arXiv:1710.05832]

    arXiv 2017

  4. [3]

    Collaboration, O3b catalog, 2021

    L.-V.-K. Collaboration, O3b catalog, 2021

    2021

  5. [4]

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

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

    2010

  6. [5]

    Amaro-Seoane et al., Laser Interferometer Space Antenna , arXiv:1702.00786

    LISA Collaboration, P. Amaro-Seoane et al., Laser Interferometer Space Antenna , arXiv:1702.00786

    arXiv

  7. [6]

    Reitze et al., Cosmic Explorer: The U.S

    D. Reitze et al., Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wav e Astronomy beyond LIGO , Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51 (2019), no. 7 035, [ arXiv:1907.04833]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [7]

    Einstein, The foundation of the general theory of relativity

    A. Einstein, The foundation of the general theory of relativity. , Annalen Phys. 49 (1916), no. 7 769–822

    1916

Show all 172 references
  1. [8]

    B. M. Barker and R. F. O’Connell, Derivation of the equations of motion of a gyroscope from the quantum theory of gravitation , Phys. Rev. D 2 (1970) 1428–1435

    1970

  2. [9]

    B. M. Barker and R. F. O’Connell, Gravitational Two-Body Problem with Arbitrary Masses, Spins, and Quadrupole Moments , Phys. Rev. D 12 (1975) 329–335

    1975

  3. [10]

    L. E. Kidder, C. M. Will, and A. G. Wiseman, Spin effects in the inspiral of coalescing compact binaries, Phys. Rev. D 47 (1993), no. 10 R4183–R4187, [ gr-qc/9211025]

    1993 arXiv

  4. [11]

    L. E. Kidder, Coalescing binary systems of compact objects to postNewtoni an 5/2 order. 5. Spin effects , Phys. Rev. D 52 (1995) 821–847, [ gr-qc/9506022]

    1995 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Blanchet, G

    L. Blanchet, G. Faye, and B. Ponsot, Gravitational field and equations of motion of compact binaries to 5/2 postNewtonian order , Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 124002, [ gr-qc/9804079]

    1998 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Tagoshi, A

    H. Tagoshi, A. Ohashi, and B. J. Owen, Gravitational field and equations of motion of spinning compact binaries to 2.5 postNewtonian order , Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 044006, [gr-qc/0010014]

    2001 arXiv

  7. [14]

    R. A. Porto, Post-Newtonian corrections to the motion of spinning bodies in NRGR , Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 104031, [ gr-qc/0511061]

    2006 arXiv

  8. [15]

    G. Faye, L. Blanchet, and A. Buonanno, Higher-order spin effects in the dynamics of compact binaries. I. Equations of motion , Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 104033, [ gr-qc/0605139]

    2006 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Blanchet, A

    L. Blanchet, A. Buonanno, and G. Faye, Higher-order spin effects in the dynamics of compact binaries. II. Radiation field , Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 104034, [ gr-qc/0605140]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 75, 049903 (2007), Erratum: Phys.Rev .D 81, 089901 (2010)]

    2006 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Damour, P

    T. Damour, P. Jaranowski, and G. Schaefer, Hamiltonian of two spinning compact bodies with next-to-leading order gravitational spin-orbit coupl ing, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 064032, [arXiv:0711.1048]

    2008 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Steinhoff, S

    J. Steinhoff, S. Hergt, and G. Schaefer, On the next-to-leading order gravitational spin(1)-spin(2) dynamics , Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 081501, [ arXiv:0712.1716]. – 27 –

    2008 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Levi, Next to Leading Order gravitational Spin1-Spin2 coupling w ith Kaluza-Klein reduction, Phys

    M. Levi, Next to Leading Order gravitational Spin1-Spin2 coupling w ith Kaluza-Klein reduction, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 064029, [ arXiv:0802.1508]

    2010 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Steinhoff, G

    J. Steinhoff, G. Schaefer, and S. Hergt, ADM canonical formalism for gravitating spinning objects, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 104018, [ arXiv:0805.3136]

    2008 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Steinhoff, S

    J. Steinhoff, S. Hergt, and G. Schaefer, Spin-squared Hamiltonian of next-to-leading order gravitational interaction, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 101503, [ arXiv:0809.2200]

    2008 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Marsat, A

    S. Marsat, A. Bohe, G. Faye, and L. Blanchet, Next-to-next-to-leading order spin-orbit effects in the equations of motion of compact binary systems , Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 055007, [ arXiv:1210.4143]

    2013 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Hergt, J

    S. Hergt, J. Steinhoff, and G. Schaefer, Reduced Hamiltonian for next-to-leading order Spin-Squared Dynamics of General Compact Binaries , Class. Quant. Grav. 27 (2010) 135007, [ arXiv:1002.2093]

    2010 arXiv

  17. [24]

    R. A. Porto, Next to leading order spin-orbit effects in the motion of inspi ralling compact binaries, Class. Quant. Grav. 27 (2010) 205001, [ arXiv:1005.5730]

    2010 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Levi, Next to Leading Order gravitational Spin-Orbit coupling in a n Effective Field Theory approach, Phys

    M. Levi, Next to Leading Order gravitational Spin-Orbit coupling in a n Effective Field Theory approach, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 104004, [ arXiv:1006.4139]

    2010 arXiv

  19. [26]

    R. A. Porto, A. Ross, and I. Z. Rothstein, Spin induced multipole moments for the gravitational wave flux from binary inspirals to third Post-N ewtonian order, JCAP 03 (2011) 009, [ arXiv:1007.1312]

    2011 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Levi, Binary dynamics from spin1-spin2 coupling at fourth post-New tonian order, Phys

    M. Levi, Binary dynamics from spin1-spin2 coupling at fourth post-New tonian order, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 064043, [ arXiv:1107.4322]

    2012 arXiv

  21. [28]

    R. A. Porto, A. Ross, and I. Z. Rothstein, Spin induced multipole moments for the gravitational wave amplitude from binary inspirals to 2.5 Po st-Newtonian order , JCAP 09 (2012) 028, [ arXiv:1203.2962]

    2012 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Hergt, J

    S. Hergt, J. Steinhoff, and G. Schaefer, On the comparison of results regarding the post-Newtonian approximate treatment of the dynamics of ex tended spinning compact binaries, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 484 (2014) 012018, [ arXiv:1205.4530]

    2014 arXiv

  23. [30]

    A. Bohe, S. Marsat, G. Faye, and L. Blanchet, Next-to-next-to-leading order spin-orbit effects in the near-zone metric and precession equations of com pact binaries , Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 075017, [ arXiv:1212.5520]

    2013 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Hartung, J

    J. Hartung, J. Steinhoff, and G. Schafer, Next-to-next-to-leading order post-Newtonian linear-in-spin binary Hamiltonians , Annalen Phys. 525 (2013) 359–394, [ arXiv:1302.6723]

    2013 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Marsat, L

    S. Marsat, L. Blanchet, A. Bohe, and G. Faye, Gravitational waves from spinning compact object binaries: New post-Newtonian results , 12, 2013. arXiv:1312.5375

    2013 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Levi and J

    M. Levi and J. Steinhoff, Leading order finite size effects with spins for inspiralling compact binaries, JHEP 06 (2015) 059, [ arXiv:1410.2601]

    2015 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Vaidya, Gravitational spin Hamiltonians from the S matrix , Phys

    V. Vaidya, Gravitational spin Hamiltonians from the S matrix , Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015), no. 2 024017, [ arXiv:1410.5348]

    2015 arXiv

  28. [35]

    A. Bohé, G. Faye, S. Marsat, and E. K. Porter, Quadratic-in-spin effects in the orbital dynamics and gravitational-wave energy flux of compact bina ries at the 3PN order , Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015), no. 19 195010, [ arXiv:1501.01529]. – 28 –

    2015 arXiv

  29. [36]

    D. Bini, A. Geralico, and J. Vines, Hyperbolic scattering of spinning particles by a Kerr black hole , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017), no. 8 084044, [ arXiv:1707.09814]

    2017 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Siemonsen, J

    N. Siemonsen, J. Steinhoff, and J. Vines, Gravitational waves from spinning binary black holes at the leading post-Newtonian orders at all orders in spi n, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018), no. 12 124046, [ arXiv:1712.08603]

    2018 arXiv

  31. [38]

    R. A. Porto and I. Z. Rothstein, The Hyperfine Einstein-Infeld-Hoffmann potential , Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 021101, [ gr-qc/0604099]

    2006 arXiv

  32. [39]

    R. A. Porto and I. Z. Rothstein, Comment on ‘On the next-to-leading order gravitational spin(1) - spin(2) dynamics’ by J. Steinhoff et al , arXiv:0712.2032

    arXiv

  33. [40]

    R. A. Porto and I. Z. Rothstein, Spin(1)Spin(2) Effects in the Motion of Inspiralling Compact Binaries at Third Order in the Post-Newtonian Expans ion, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 044012, [ arXiv:0802.0720]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 81, 029904 (2010)]

    2008 arXiv

  34. [41]

    R. A. Porto and I. Z. Rothstein, Next to Leading Order Spin(1)Spin(1) Effects in the Motion of Inspiralling Compact Binaries , Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 044013, [arXiv:0804.0260]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 81, 029905 (2010)]

    2008 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Levi and J

    M. Levi and J. Steinhoff, Equivalence of ADM Hamiltonian and Effective Field Theory approaches at next-to-next-to-leading order spin1-spin2 coupling of binary inspirals , JCAP 12 (2014) 003, [ arXiv:1408.5762]

    2014 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Levi and J

    M. Levi and J. Steinhoff, Spinning gravitating objects in the effective field theory in t he post-Newtonian scheme, JHEP 09 (2015) 219, [ arXiv:1501.04956]

    2015 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Levi and J

    M. Levi and J. Steinhoff, Next-to-next-to-leading order gravitational spin-orbit c oupling via the effective field theory for spinning objects in the post-New tonian scheme , JCAP 01 (2016) 011, [ arXiv:1506.05056]

    2016 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Levi and J

    M. Levi and J. Steinhoff, Next-to-next-to-leading order gravitational spin-squar ed potential via the effective field theory for spinning objects in the post- Newtonian scheme , JCAP 01 (2016) 008, [ arXiv:1506.05794]

    2016 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Levi and J

    M. Levi and J. Steinhoff, Complete conservative dynamics for inspiralling compact bi naries with spins at the fourth post-Newtonian order , JCAP 09 (2021) 029, [ arXiv:1607.04252]

    2021 arXiv

  40. [47]

    M. Levi, S. Mougiakakos, and M. Vieira, Gravitational cubic-in-spin interaction at the next-to-leading post-Newtonian order , JHEP 01 (2021) 036, [ arXiv:1912.06276]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Levi and F

    M. Levi and F. Teng, NLO gravitational quartic-in-spin interaction , JHEP 01 (2021) 066, [arXiv:2008.12280]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [49]

    M. Levi, A. J. Mcleod, and M. Von Hippel, N3LO gravitational spin-orbit coupling at order G4, JHEP 07 (2021) 115, [ arXiv:2003.02827]

    2021 arXiv

  43. [50]

    M. Levi, A. J. Mcleod, and M. Von Hippel, N3LO gravitational quadratic-in-spin interactions at G 4, JHEP 07 (2021) 116, [ arXiv:2003.07890]

    2021 arXiv

  44. [51]

    J.-W. Kim, M. Levi, and Z. Yin, Quadratic-in-spin interactions at fifth post-Newtonian order probe new physics , Phys. Lett. B 834 (2022) 137410, [ arXiv:2112.01509]

    2022 arXiv

  45. [52]

    N. T. Maia, C. R. Galley, A. K. Leibovich, and R. A. Porto, Radiation reaction for spinning bodies in effective field theory I: Spin-orbit effects , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017), no. 8 084064, [arXiv:1705.07934]. – 29 –

    2017 arXiv

  46. [53]

    N. T. Maia, C. R. Galley, A. K. Leibovich, and R. A. Porto, Radiation reaction for spinning bodies in effective field theory II: Spin-spin effects , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017), no. 8 084065, [arXiv:1705.07938]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [54]

    G. Cho, B. Pardo, and R. A. Porto, Gravitational radiation from inspiralling compact objects: Spin-spin effects completed at the next-to-leadin g post-Newtonian order , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 2 024037, [ arXiv:2103.14612]

    2021 arXiv

  48. [55]

    G. Cho, R. A. Porto, and Z. Yang, Gravitational radiation from inspiralling compact objects: Spin effects to the fourth post-Newtonian order , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 10 L101501, [ arXiv:2201.05138]

    2022 arXiv

  49. [56]

    J.-W. Kim, M. Levi, and Z. Yin, N3LO spin-orbit interaction via the EFT of spinning gravitating objects, JHEP 05 (2023) 184, [ arXiv:2208.14949]

    2023 arXiv

  50. [57]

    M. K. Mandal, P. Mastrolia, R. Patil, and J. Steinhoff, Gravitational spin-orbit Hamiltonian at NNNLO in the post-Newtonian framework , JHEP 03 (2023) 130, [ arXiv:2209.00611]

    2023 arXiv

  51. [58]

    J.-W. Kim, M. Levi, and Z. Yin, N3LO quadratic-in-spin interactions for generic compact binaries, JHEP 03 (2023) 098, [ arXiv:2209.09235]

    2023 arXiv

  52. [59]

    M. K. Mandal, P. Mastrolia, R. Patil, and J. Steinhoff, Gravitational quadratic-in-spin Hamiltonian at NNNLO in the post-Newtonian framework , JHEP 07 (2023) 128, [arXiv:2210.09176]

    2023 arXiv

  53. [60]

    M. Levi, R. Morales, and Z. Yin, From the EFT of spinning gravitating objects to Poincaré and gauge invariance at the 4.5PN precision frontier , JHEP 09 (2023) 090, [arXiv:2210.17538]

    2023 arXiv

  54. [61]

    Levi and Z

    M. Levi and Z. Yin, Completing the fifth PN precision frontier via the EFT of spin ning gravitating objects, JHEP 04 (2023) 079, [ arXiv:2211.14018]

    2023 arXiv

  55. [62]

    D. Bini, T. Damour, and A. Geralico, Sixth post-Newtonian nonlocal-in-time dynamics of binary systems , Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 8 084047, [ arXiv:2007.11239]

    2020 arXiv

  56. [63]

    Bini and T

    D. Bini and T. Damour, Gravitational spin-orbit coupling in binary systems, post-Minkowskian approximation and effective one-body the ory, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017), no. 10 104038, [ arXiv:1709.00590]

    2017 arXiv

  57. [64]

    Bini and T

    D. Bini and T. Damour, Gravitational spin-orbit coupling in binary systems at the se cond post-Minkowskian approximation, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018), no. 4 044036, [arXiv:1805.10809]

    2018 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Maybee, D

    B. Maybee, D. O’Connell, and J. Vines, Observables and amplitudes for spinning particles and black holes , JHEP 12 (2019) 156, [ arXiv:1906.09260]

    2019 arXiv

  59. [66]

    Guevara, A

    A. Guevara, A. Ochirov, and J. Vines, Black-hole scattering with general spin directions from minimal-coupling amplitudes , Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019), no. 10 104024, [arXiv:1906.10071]

    2019 arXiv

  60. [67]

    Chung, Y.-t

    M.-Z. Chung, Y.-t. Huang, J.-W. Kim, and S. Lee, Complete Hamiltonian for spinning binary systems at first post-Minkowskian order , JHEP 05 (2020) 105, [ arXiv:2003.06600]

    2020 arXiv

  61. [68]

    Guevara, Holomorphic Classical Limit for Spin Effects in Gravitationa l and Electromagnetic Scattering, JHEP 04 (2019) 033, [ arXiv:1706.02314]

    A. Guevara, Holomorphic Classical Limit for Spin Effects in Gravitationa l and Electromagnetic Scattering, JHEP 04 (2019) 033, [ arXiv:1706.02314]

    2019 arXiv

  62. [69]

    Vines, J

    J. Vines, J. Steinhoff, and A. Buonanno, Spinning-black-hole scattering and the – 30 – test-black-hole limit at second post-Minkowskian order , Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019), no. 6 064054, [ arXiv:1812.00956]

    2019 arXiv

  63. [70]

    P. H. Damgaard, K. Haddad, and A. Helset, Heavy Black Hole Effective Theory , JHEP 11 (2019) 070, [ arXiv:1908.10308]

    2019 arXiv

  64. [71]

    Aoude, K

    R. Aoude, K. Haddad, and A. Helset, On-shell heavy particle effective theories , JHEP 05 (2020) 051, [ arXiv:2001.09164]

    2020 arXiv

  65. [72]

    Vines, Scattering of two spinning black holes in post-Minkowskian g ravity, to all orders in spin, and effective-one-body mappings , Class

    J. Vines, Scattering of two spinning black holes in post-Minkowskian g ravity, to all orders in spin, and effective-one-body mappings , Class. Quant. Grav. 35 (2018), no. 8 084002, [arXiv:1709.06016]

    2018 arXiv

  66. [73]

    Guevara, A

    A. Guevara, A. Ochirov, and J. Vines, Scattering of Spinning Black Holes from Exponentiated Soft Factors , JHEP 09 (2019) 056, [ arXiv:1812.06895]

    2019 arXiv

  67. [74]

    Chung, Y.-T

    M.-Z. Chung, Y.-T. Huang, J.-W. Kim, and S. Lee, The simplest massive S-matrix: from minimal coupling to Black Holes , JHEP 04 (2019) 156, [ arXiv:1812.08752]

    2019 arXiv

  68. [75]

    Chung, Y.-T

    M.-Z. Chung, Y.-T. Huang, and J.-W. Kim, Classical potential for general spinning bodies , JHEP 09 (2020) 074, [ arXiv:1908.08463]

    2020 arXiv

  69. [76]

    Z. Bern, A. Luna, R. Roiban, C.-H. Shen, and M. Zeng, Spinning black hole binary dynamics, scattering amplitudes, and effective field theory , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 6 065014, [ arXiv:2005.03071]

    2021 arXiv

  70. [77]

    Kosmopoulos and A

    D. Kosmopoulos and A. Luna, Quadratic-in-spin Hamiltonian at O(G2) from scattering amplitudes, JHEP 07 (2021) 037, [ arXiv:2102.10137]

    2021 arXiv

  71. [78]

    Z. Liu, R. A. Porto, and Z. Yang, Spin Effects in the Effective Field Theory Approach to Post-Minkowskian Conservative Dynamics , JHEP 06 (2021) 012, [ arXiv:2102.10059]

    2021 arXiv

  72. [79]

    Aoude and A

    R. Aoude and A. Ochirov, Classical observables from coherent-spin amplitudes , JHEP 10 (2021) 008, [ arXiv:2108.01649]

    2021 arXiv

  73. [80]

    G. U. Jakobsen, G. Mogull, J. Plefka, and J. Steinhoff, Gravitational Bremsstrahlung and Hidden Supersymmetry of Spinning Bodies , Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022), no. 1 011101, [arXiv:2106.10256]

    2022 arXiv

  74. [81]

    G. U. Jakobsen, G. Mogull, J. Plefka, and J. Steinhoff, SUSY in the sky with gravitons , JHEP 01 (2022) 027, [ arXiv:2109.04465]

    2022 arXiv

  75. [82]

    Chen, M.-Z

    W.-M. Chen, M.-Z. Chung, Y.-t. Huang, and J.-W. Kim, The 2PM Hamiltonian for binary Kerr to quartic in spin , JHEP 08 (2022) 148, [ arXiv:2111.13639]

    2022 arXiv

  76. [83]

    Chen, M.-Z

    W.-M. Chen, M.-Z. Chung, Y.-t. Huang, and J.-W. Kim, Gravitational Faraday effect from on-shell amplitudes , JHEP 12 (2022) 058, [ arXiv:2205.07305]

    2022 arXiv

  77. [84]

    Cristofoli, R

    A. Cristofoli, R. Gonzo, N. Moynihan, D. O’Connell, A. R oss, M. Sergola, and C. D. White, The Uncertainty Principle and Classical Amplitudes , arXiv:2112.07556

    arXiv

  78. [85]

    Chiodaroli, H

    M. Chiodaroli, H. Johansson, and P. Pichini, Compton black-hole scattering for s ≤ 5/2, JHEP 02 (2022) 156, [ arXiv:2107.14779]

    2022 arXiv

  79. [86]

    Cangemi and P

    L. Cangemi and P. Pichini, Classical limit of higher-spin string amplitudes , JHEP 06 (2023) 167, [ arXiv:2207.03947]

    2023 arXiv

  80. [87]

    Cangemi, M

    L. Cangemi, M. Chiodaroli, H. Johansson, A. Ochirov, P. Pichini, and E. Skvortsov, Kerr Black Holes Enjoy Massive Higher-Spin Gauge Symmetry , arXiv:2212.06120. – 31 –

    arXiv

  81. [88]

    Haddad, Exponentiation of the leading eikonal phase with spin , Phys

    K. Haddad, Exponentiation of the leading eikonal phase with spin , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 2 026004, [ arXiv:2109.04427]

    2022 arXiv

  82. [89]

    Aoude, K

    R. Aoude, K. Haddad, and A. Helset, Searching for Kerr in the 2PM amplitude , JHEP 07 (2022) 072, [ arXiv:2203.06197]

    2022 arXiv

  83. [90]

    Menezes and M

    G. Menezes and M. Sergola, NLO deflections for spinning particles and Kerr black holes , JHEP 10 (2022) 105, [ arXiv:2205.11701]

    2022 arXiv

  84. [91]

    Z. Bern, D. Kosmopoulos, A. Luna, R. Roiban, and F. Teng, Binary Dynamics through the Fifth Power of Spin at O(G2), Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 20 201402, [arXiv:2203.06202]

    2023 arXiv

  85. [92]

    Alessio and P

    F. Alessio and P. Di Vecchia, Radiation reaction for spinning black-hole scattering , Phys. Lett. B 832 (2022) 137258, [ arXiv:2203.13272]

    2022 arXiv

  86. [93]

    Alessio, Kerr binary dynamics from minimal coupling and double copy , arXiv:2303.12784

    F. Alessio, Kerr binary dynamics from minimal coupling and double copy , arXiv:2303.12784

    arXiv

  87. [94]

    N. E. J. Bjerrum-Bohr, G. Chen, and M. Skowronek, Classical spin gravitational Compton scattering, JHEP 06 (2023) 170, [ arXiv:2302.00498]

    2023 arXiv

  88. [95]

    P. H. Damgaard, J. Hoogeveen, A. Luna, and J. Vines, Scattering angles in Kerr metrics , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 12 124030, [ arXiv:2208.11028]

    2022 arXiv

  89. [96]

    Haddad, Recursion in the classical limit and the neutron-star Compto n amplitude , JHEP 05 (2023) 177, [ arXiv:2303.02624]

    K. Haddad, Recursion in the classical limit and the neutron-star Compto n amplitude , JHEP 05 (2023) 177, [ arXiv:2303.02624]

    2023 arXiv

  90. [97]

    Aoude, K

    R. Aoude, K. Haddad, and A. Helset, Classical gravitational scattering amplitude at O(G2S1∞S2∞), Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023), no. 2 024050, [ arXiv:2304.13740]

    2023 arXiv

  91. [98]

    G. U. Jakobsen, G. Mogull, J. Plefka, B. Sauer, and Y. Xu, Conservative Scattering of Spinning Black Holes at Fourth Post-Minkowskian Order , Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023), no. 15 151401, [ arXiv:2306.01714]

    2023 arXiv

  92. [99]

    G. U. Jakobsen, G. Mogull, J. Plefka, and B. Sauer, Dissipative scattering of spinning black holes at fourth post-Minkowskian order , arXiv:2308.11514

    arXiv

  93. [100]

    Heissenberg, Angular Momentum Loss Due to Spin-Orbit Effects in the Post-Minkowskian Expansion, arXiv:2308.11470

    C. Heissenberg, Angular Momentum Loss Due to Spin-Orbit Effects in the Post-Minkowskian Expansion, arXiv:2308.11470

    arXiv

  94. [101]

    Bianchi, C

    M. Bianchi, C. Gambino, and F. Riccioni, A Rutherford-like formula for scattering off Kerr-Newman BHs and subleading corrections , JHEP 08 (2023) 188, [ arXiv:2306.08969]

    2023 arXiv

  95. [102]

    D. Bini, T. Damour, and A. Geralico, Gravitational bremsstrahlung waveform at the fourth post-Minkowskian order and the second post-Newtonian leve l, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 6 064035, [ arXiv:2407.02076]

    2024 arXiv

  96. [103]

    Bini and T

    D. Bini and T. Damour, Fourth post-Minkowskian local-in-time conservative dynami cs of binary systems , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 6 064005, [ arXiv:2406.04878]

    2024 arXiv

  97. [104]

    Dlapa, G

    C. Dlapa, G. Kälin, Z. Liu, and R. A. Porto, Local in Time Conservative Binary Dynamics at Fourth Post-Minkowskian Order , Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024), no. 22 221401, [arXiv:2403.04853]

    2024 arXiv

  98. [105]

    G. U. Jakobsen, G. Mogull, J. Plefka, and B. Sauer, Tidal effects and renormalization at fourth post-Minkowskian order , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 4 L041504, [arXiv:2312.00719]. – 32 –

    2024 arXiv

  99. [106]

    J. Jing, W. Deng, S. Long, and J. Wang, Effective metric of spinless binaries with radiation-reaction effect up to fourth post-Minkowskian ord er in effective-one-body theory , Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023), no. 7 608, [ arXiv:2307.05971]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 83, 712 (2023)]

    2023 arXiv

  100. [107]

    P. H. Damgaard, E. R. Hansen, L. Planté, and P. Vanhove, Classical observables from the exponential representation of the gravitational S-matrix , JHEP 09 (2023) 183, [arXiv:2307.04746]

    2023 arXiv

  101. [108]

    Z. Bern, J. Parra-Martinez, R. Roiban, M. S. Ruf, C.-H. Shen, M. P. Solon, and M. Zeng, Scattering amplitudes and conservative dynamics at the fourth post-Minkowskian order, PoS LL2022 (2022) 051

    2022

  102. [109]

    Dlapa, G

    C. Dlapa, G. Kälin, Z. Liu, J. Neef, and R. A. Porto, Radiation Reaction and Gravitational Waves at Fourth Post-Minkowskian Order , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 10 101401, [arXiv:2210.05541]

    2023 arXiv

  103. [110]

    Khalil, A

    M. Khalil, A. Buonanno, J. Steinhoff, and J. Vines, Energetics and scattering of gravitational two-body systems at fourth post-Minkowskian order, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 2 024042, [ arXiv:2204.05047]

    2022 arXiv

  104. [111]

    Z. Bern, J. Parra-Martinez, R. Roiban, M. S. Ruf, C.-H. Shen, M. P. Solon, and M. Zeng, Scattering Amplitudes, the Tail Effect, and Conservative Bina ry Dynamics at O(G4) , Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022), no. 16 161103, [ arXiv:2112.10750]

    2022 arXiv

  105. [112]

    Dlapa, G

    C. Dlapa, G. Kälin, Z. Liu, and R. A. Porto, Dynamics of binary systems to fourth Post-Minkowskian order from the effective field theory approa ch, Phys. Lett. B 831 (2022) 137203, [ arXiv:2106.08276]

    2022 arXiv

  106. [113]

    Z. Bern, J. Parra-Martinez, R. Roiban, M. S. Ruf, C.-H. Shen, M. P. Solon, and M. Zeng, Scattering Amplitudes and Conservative Binary Dynamics at O(G4), Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021), no. 17 171601, [ arXiv:2101.07254]

    2021 arXiv

  107. [114]

    Z. Bern, E. Herrmann, R. Roiban, M. S. Ruf, and M. Zeng, Global Bases for Nonplanar Loop Integrands, Generalized Unitarity, and the Double Copy t o All Loop Orders , arXiv:2408.06686

    arXiv

  108. [115]

    Parra-Martinez, M

    J. Parra-Martinez, M. S. Ruf, and M. Zeng, Extremal black hole scattering at O(G3): graviton dominance, eikonal exponentiation, and different ial equations , JHEP 11 (2020) 023, [ arXiv:2005.04236]

    2020 arXiv

  109. [116]

    Herrmann, J

    E. Herrmann, J. Parra-Martinez, M. S. Ruf, and M. Zeng, Radiative classical gravitational observables at O(G3) from scattering amplitudes , JHEP 10 (2021) 148, [arXiv:2104.03957]

    2021 arXiv

  110. [117]

    A. V. Smirnov and M. Zeng, FIRE 6.5: Feynman integral reduction with new simplification library, Comput. Phys. Commun. 302 (2024) 109261, [ arXiv:2311.02370]

    2024 arXiv

  111. [118]

    Laporta, High-precision calculation of multiloop Feynman integral s by difference equations, Int

    S. Laporta, High-precision calculation of multiloop Feynman integral s by difference equations, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 15 (2000) 5087–5159, [ hep-ph/0102033]

    2000 arXiv

  112. [119]

    Z. Bern, J. J. M. Carrasco, and H. Johansson, Perturbative Quantum Gravity as a Double Copy of Gauge Theory , Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 061602, [ arXiv:1004.0476]

    2010 arXiv

  113. [120]

    Z. Bern, J. J. Carrasco, M. Chiodaroli, H. Johansson, a nd R. Roiban, The duality between color and kinematics and its applications , J. Phys. A 57 (2024), no. 33 333002, [arXiv:1909.01358]. – 33 –

    2024 arXiv

  114. [121]

    Z. Bern, C. Cheung, R. Roiban, C.-H. Shen, M. P. Solon, a nd M. Zeng, Black Hole Binary Dynamics from the Double Copy and Effective Theory , JHEP 10 (2019) 206, [arXiv:1908.01493]

    2019 arXiv

  115. [122]

    Monteiro, D

    R. Monteiro, D. O’Connell, and C. D. White, Black holes and the double copy , JHEP 12 (2014) 056, [ arXiv:1410.0239]

    2014 arXiv

  116. [123]

    Dlapa, J

    C. Dlapa, J. M. Henn, and F. J. Wagner, An algorithmic approach to finding canonical differential equations for elliptic Feynman integrals , JHEP 08 (2023) 120, [arXiv:2211.16357]

    2023 arXiv

  117. [124]

    Badger, J

    S. Badger, J. Henn, J. C. Plefka, and S. Zoia, Scattering Amplitudes in Quantum Field Theory, Lect. Notes Phys. 1021 (2024) pp., [ arXiv:2306.05976]

    2024 arXiv

  118. [125]

    Edison and M

    A. Edison and M. Levi, Higher-order tails and RG flows due to scattering of gravitatio nal radiation from binary inspirals , JHEP 08 (2024) 161, [ arXiv:2310.20066]

    2024 arXiv

  119. [126]

    C. R. T. Jones and M. S. Ruf, Absorptive Effects and Classical Black Hole Scattering , arXiv:2310.00069

    arXiv

  120. [127]

    Z. Bern, D. Kosmopoulos, A. Luna, R. Roiban, T. Scheopn er, F. Teng, and J. Vines, Quantum Field Theory, Worldline Theory, and Spin Magnitude Cha nge in Orbital Evolution, arXiv:2308.14176

    arXiv

  121. [128]

    Alaverdian, Z

    M. Alaverdian, Z. Bern, D. Kosmopoulos, A. Luna, R. Roi ban, T. Scheopner, and F. Teng, Conservative Spin Magnitude Change in Orbital Evolution in Ge neral Relativity, arXiv:2407.10928

    arXiv

  122. [129]

    J. P. Gatica, The Eikonal Phase and Spinning Observables , arXiv:2312.04680

    arXiv

  123. [130]

    Bohnenblust, L

    L. Bohnenblust, L. Cangemi, H. Johansson, and P. Pichi ni, Binary Kerr black-hole scattering at 2PM from quantum higher-spin Compton , arXiv:2410.23271

    arXiv

  124. [131]

    Y. F. Bautista, Y.-T. Huang, and J.-W. Kim, Absorptive Effects in Black Hole Scattering , arXiv:2411.03382

    arXiv

  125. [132]

    Aoude, A

    R. Aoude, A. Cristofoli, A. Elkhidir, and M. Sergola, Inelastic Coupled-Channel Eikonal Scattering, arXiv:2411.02294

    arXiv

  126. [133]

    Aoude, K

    R. Aoude, K. Haddad, C. Heissenberg, and A. Helset, Leading-order gravitational radiation to all spin orders , arXiv:2310.05832

    arXiv

  127. [134]

    Brandhuber, G

    A. Brandhuber, G. R. Brown, P. Pichini, G. Travaglini, and P. Vives Matasan, Spinning binary dynamics in cubic effective field theories of gravity , JHEP 08 (2024) 188, [arXiv:2405.13826]

    2024 arXiv

  128. [135]

    Brandhuber, G

    A. Brandhuber, G. R. Brown, G. Chen, G. Travaglini, and P. Vives Matasan, Spinning waveforms in cubic effective field theories of gravity , arXiv:2408.00587

    arXiv

  129. [136]

    D. A. Kosower, B. Maybee, and D. O’Connell, Amplitudes, Observables, and Classical Scattering, JHEP 02 (2019) 137, [ arXiv:1811.10950]

    2019 arXiv

  130. [137]

    K. Aoki, A. Cristofoli, and Y.-t. Huang, On-Shell Approach to Black Hole Mergers , arXiv:2410.13632

    arXiv

  131. [138]

    Buonanno, G

    A. Buonanno, G. Mogull, R. Patil, and L. Pompili, Post-Minkowskian Theory Meets the Spinning Effective-One-Body Approach for Bound-Orbit Wavef orms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024), no. 21 211402, [ arXiv:2405.19181]. – 34 –

    2024 arXiv

  132. [139]

    Bohnenblust, H

    L. Bohnenblust, H. Ita, M. Kraus, and J. Schlenk, Gravitational Bremsstrahlung in Black-Hole Scattering at O(G3): Linear-in-Spin Effects , arXiv:2312.14859

    arXiv

  133. [140]

    Brandhuber, G

    A. Brandhuber, G. R. Brown, G. Chen, J. Gowdy, and G. Tra vaglini, Resummed spinning waveforms from five-point amplitudes , arXiv:2310.04405

    arXiv

  134. [142]

    D. Bini, T. Damour, S. De Angelis, A. Geralico, A. Herde rschee, R. Roiban, and F. Teng, Gravitational waveforms: A tale of two formalisms , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 12 125008, [ arXiv:2402.06604]

    2024 arXiv

  135. [143]

    Herderschee, R

    A. Herderschee, R. Roiban, and F. Teng, The sub-leading scattering waveform from amplitudes, JHEP 06 (2023) 004, [ arXiv:2303.06112]

    2023 arXiv

  136. [144]

    Kosmopoulos and M

    D. Kosmopoulos and M. P. Solon, Gravitational self force from scattering amplitudes in curved space, JHEP 03 (2024) 125, [ arXiv:2308.15304]

    2024 arXiv

  137. [145]

    Cristofoli, R

    A. Cristofoli, R. Gonzo, D. A. Kosower, and D. O’Connel l, Waveforms from amplitudes , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 5 056007, [ arXiv:2107.10193]

    2022 arXiv

  138. [146]

    Georgoudis, C

    A. Georgoudis, C. Heissenberg, and R. Russo, An eikonal-inspired approach to the gravitational scattering waveform , JHEP 03 (2024) 089, [ arXiv:2312.07452]

    2024 arXiv

  139. [147]

    Z. Bern, J. J. M. Carrasco, M. Chiodaroli, H. Johansson , and R. Roiban, Supergravity amplitudes, the double copy and ultraviolet behavior , arXiv:2304.07392

    arXiv

  140. [148]

    Haddad, G

    K. Haddad, G. U. Jakobsen, G. Mogull, and J. Plefka, Spinning bodies in general relativity from bosonic worldline oscillators , arXiv:2411.08176

    arXiv

  141. [149]

    Febres Cordero, M

    F. Febres Cordero, M. Kraus, G. Lin, M. S. Ruf, and M. Zen g, Conservative Binary Dynamics with a Spinning Black Hole at O(G3) from Scattering A mplitudes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 2 021601, [ arXiv:2205.07357]

    2023 arXiv

  142. [150]

    Arkani-Hamed, T.-C

    N. Arkani-Hamed, T.-C. Huang, and Y.-t. Huang, Scattering amplitudes for all masses and spins, JHEP 11 (2021) 070, [ arXiv:1709.04891]

    2021 arXiv

  143. [151]

    Y. F. Bautista, A. Guevara, C. Kavanagh, and J. Vines, Scattering in black hole backgrounds and higher-spin amplitudes. Part II , JHEP 05 (2023) 211, [ arXiv:2212.07965]

    2023 arXiv

  144. [152]

    Y. F. Bautista, M. Khalil, M. Sergola, C. Kavanagh, and J. Vines, Post-Newtonian observables for aligned-spin binaries to sixth order in spin f rom gravitational self-force and Compton amplitudes , arXiv:2408.01871

    arXiv

  145. [153]

    Y. F. Bautista, G. Bonelli, C. Iossa, A. Tanzini, and Z. Zhou, Black hole perturbation theory meets CFT2: Kerr-Compton amplitudes from Nekrasov-Shatashv ili functions , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 8 084071, [ arXiv:2312.05965]

    2024 arXiv

  146. [154]

    L. P. S. Singh and C. R. Hagen, Lagrangian formulation for arbitrary spin. 1. The boson case, Phys. Rev. D 9 (1974) 898–909

    1974

  147. [155]

    L. W. Lindwasser, Consistent actions for massive particles interacting with electromagnetism and gravity , arXiv:2309.03901

    arXiv

  148. [156]

    L. W. Lindwasser, Covariant actions and propagators for all spins, masses, and d imensions, arXiv:2307.11750. – 35 –

    arXiv

  149. [157]

    Akpinar, F

    D. Akpinar, F. Febres Cordero, M. Kraus, M. S. Ruf, and M . Zeng, Spinning Black Hole Scattering atO(G3S2): Casimir Terms, Radial Action and Hidden Symmetry , arXiv:2407.19005

    arXiv

  150. [158]

    Z. Bern, E. Herrmann, R. Roiban, M. S. Ruf, A. V. Smirnov , V. A. Smirnov, and M. Zeng, Amplitudes, supersymmetric black hole scattering at O ( G5) , and loop integration , JHEP 10 (2024) 023, [ arXiv:2406.01554]

    2024

  151. [159]

    Gonzo and C

    R. Gonzo and C. Shi, Scattering and bound observables for spinning particles in Kerr spacetime with generic spin orientations , arXiv:2405.09687

    arXiv

  152. [160]

    Wilson-Gerow, Conservative scattering of Reissner-Nordström black holes at third post-Minkowskian order, JHEP 05 (2024) 265, [ arXiv:2310.17731]

    J. Wilson-Gerow, Conservative scattering of Reissner-Nordström black holes at third post-Minkowskian order, JHEP 05 (2024) 265, [ arXiv:2310.17731]

    2024 arXiv

  153. [161]

    Z. Bern, J. P. Gatica, E. Herrmann, A. Luna, and M. Zeng, Scalar QED as a toy model for higher-order effects in classical gravitational scattering , JHEP 08 (2022) 131, [arXiv:2112.12243]

    2022 arXiv

  154. [162]

    Alessio and P

    F. Alessio and P. Di Vecchia, 2PM waveform from loop corrected soft theorems , J. Phys. A 57 (2024), no. 47 475402, [ arXiv:2402.06533]

    2024 arXiv

  155. [163]

    Di Vecchia, C

    P. Di Vecchia, C. Heissenberg, R. Russo, and G. Venezia no, The eikonal operator at arbitrary velocities I: the soft-radiation limit , JHEP 07 (2022) 039, [ arXiv:2204.02378]

    2022 arXiv

  156. [164]

    Bellazzini, G

    B. Bellazzini, G. Isabella, and M. M. Riva, Classical vs quantum eikonal scattering and its causal structure, JHEP 04 (2023) 023, [ arXiv:2211.00085]

    2023 arXiv

  157. [165]

    Correia and G

    M. Correia and G. Isabella, The Born regime of gravitational amplitudes , arXiv:2406.13737

    arXiv

  158. [166]

    Di Vecchia, C

    P. Di Vecchia, C. Heissenberg, R. Russo, and G. Venezia no, The eikonal approach to gravitational scattering and radiation at O(G3), JHEP 07 (2021) 169, [ arXiv:2104.03256]

    2021 arXiv

  159. [167]

    Di Vecchia, C

    P. Di Vecchia, C. Heissenberg, R. Russo, and G. Venezia no, Classical gravitational observables from the Eikonal operator , Phys. Lett. B 843 (2023) 138049, [arXiv:2210.12118]

    2023 arXiv

  160. [168]

    Di Vecchia, C

    P. Di Vecchia, C. Heissenberg, R. Russo, and G. Venezia no, The gravitational eikonal: from particle, string and brane collisions to black-hole encounte rs, arXiv:2306.16488

    arXiv

  161. [169]

    Ajith, Y

    S. Ajith, Y. Du, R. Rajagopal, and D. Vaman, Worldline Formalism, Eikonal Expansion and the Classical Limit of Scattering Amplitudes , arXiv:2409.17866

    arXiv

  162. [170]

    Y. Du, S. Ajith, R. Rajagopal, and D. Vaman, Worldline Proof of Eikonal Exponentiation , arXiv:2409.12895

    arXiv

  163. [171]

    Forde, Direct extraction of one-loop integral coefficients , Phys

    D. Forde, Direct extraction of one-loop integral coefficients , Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 125019, [arXiv:0704.1835]

    2007 arXiv

  164. [172]

    De Angelis, R

    S. De Angelis, R. Gonzo, and P. P. Novichkov, Spinning waveforms from KMOC at leading order, arXiv:2309.17429. – 36 –

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.