pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2004.06503 · v2 · submitted 2020-04-14 · 🌀 gr-qc

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

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

Geraint Pratten , Cecilio Garc\'ia-Quir\'os , Marta Colleoni , Antoni Ramos-Buades , H\'ector Estell\'es , Maite Mateu-Lucena , Rafel Jaume , Maria Haney
show 3 more authors
David Keitel Jonathan E. Thompson Sascha Husa
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 21:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc
keywords gravitational wavesbinary black holesprecessing binariesphenomenological waveformshigher multipolestwisting-up mapsIMRPhenom family
0
0 comments X

The pith

IMRPhenomXPHM extends aligned-spin models to precessing black hole binaries by twisting up sub-dominant harmonic modes.

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

The paper introduces IMRPhenomXPHM, a frequency-domain phenomenological waveform model for quasi-circular precessing binary black holes that includes multipoles beyond the dominant quadrupole. It builds directly on the aligned-spin IMRPhenomXHM by applying approximate twisting-up maps to convert co-precessing modes into inertial-frame modes. Two mapping options are implemented: a single-spin post-Newtonian approximation and a double-spin multiple-scale analysis. Interpolation of Euler angles is used to keep the model computationally efficient. The resulting family of models supports analysis of signals with precession and higher modes in current gravitational-wave detectors.

Core claim

IMRPhenomXPHM is constructed by taking the aligned-spin modes from IMRPhenomXHM and applying twisting-up transformations to obtain precessing inertial-frame modes, with the choice of single-spin PN or double-spin MSA maps determining how spin precession is incorporated while preserving the underlying aligned-spin amplitude and phase information.

What carries the argument

Twisting-up maps that rotate aligned-spin modes from the co-precessing frame into the inertial frame using Euler angles derived from either single-spin PN or double-spin MSA approximations.

If this is right

  • The model recovers IMRPhenomXP when restricted to the dominant quadrupole.
  • Interpolation of the Euler angles reduces evaluation cost while retaining the same mode content.
  • Higher multipoles become available for parameter estimation of precessing systems without separate aligned-spin runs.
  • The modular structure allows future replacement of the underlying aligned-spin model or the twisting maps.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Extending the same twisting procedure to eccentric orbits would require only new aligned-spin base models.
  • Systematic differences between the single-spin and double-spin maps could be used as an internal uncertainty estimate in data analysis.
  • The computational savings from interpolation become more important as detector sensitivity increases the number of detectable precessing events.

Load-bearing premise

The twisting-up maps must accurately convert aligned-spin modes into precessing ones without introducing large systematic errors.

What would settle it

Direct mismatch between IMRPhenomXPHM waveforms and numerical-relativity simulations for precessing binaries with measurable higher-mode content at signal-to-noise ratios above 20 would falsify the claim of sufficient accuracy.

read the original abstract

We present IMRPhenomXPHM, a phenomenological frequency-domain model for the gravitational-wave signal emitted by quasi-circular precessing binary black holes, which incorporates multipoles beyond the dominant quadrupole in the precessing frame. The model is a precessing extension of IMRPhenomXHM (Garc\'ia-Quir\'os 2020), based on approximate maps between aligned-spin waveform modes in the co-precessing frame and precessing waveform modes in the inertial frame, which is commonly referred to as "twisting up" the non-precessing waveforms. IMRPhenomXPHM includes IMRPhenomXP as a special case, the restriction to the dominant quadrupole contribution in the co-precessing frame. We implement two alternative mappings, one based on a single-spin PN approximation, as used in IMRPhenomPv2 (Hannam 2013), and one based on the double-spin MSA approach (Chatziioannou 2017). We include a detailed discussion of conventions used in the description of precessing binaries and of all choices made in constructing the model. The computational cost of \phXPHM is further reduced by extending the interpolation technique of (C. Garc\'ia-Quir\'os 2020) to the Euler angles. The accuracy, speed, robustness and modularity of the IMRPhenomX family will make these models productive tools for gravitational wave astronomy in the current era of greatly increased number and diversity of detected events.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents IMRPhenomXPHM, a phenomenological frequency-domain model for gravitational-wave signals from quasi-circular precessing binary black holes. It extends IMRPhenomXHM by applying approximate twisting-up maps (single-spin PN and double-spin MSA) to include multipoles beyond the dominant quadrupole in the co-precessing frame, reduces computational cost by extending interpolation to Euler angles, and recovers IMRPhenomXP as a special case.

Significance. If the accuracy of the twisting-up maps for higher modes holds, the model would be a useful extension of the IMRPhenom family, enabling efficient inclusion of precession and sub-dominant harmonics in data analysis for the growing catalog of GW events. The explicit discussion of conventions and the modular design are strengths; the extension of the García-Quirós et al. (2020) interpolation technique to Euler angles directly addresses computational efficiency.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (model construction): The central claim that sub-dominant modes are accurately incorporated rests on the fidelity of the twisting-up maps, yet the manuscript provides no mismatch values, phase-error budgets, or NR comparisons that isolate the contribution of these maps (or their degradation with inclination) to the (2,1), (3,3) and higher content.
  2. [§5] §5 (accuracy assessment): No quantitative validation metrics against numerical relativity are shown for the full IMRPhenomXPHM waveforms that would demonstrate the net improvement over IMRPhenomXP once the twisting-up approximations are applied to the higher modes from IMRPhenomXHM.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] The detailed discussion of conventions for precessing binaries is helpful for reproducibility but could be cross-referenced more explicitly to the equations defining the Euler-angle evolution.
  2. Figure captions should state the specific mass ratio, spin magnitudes, and inclination used in each panel to allow direct comparison with the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We appreciate the positive assessment of the model's potential utility for gravitational-wave data analysis. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the validation of the twisting-up maps and the full waveforms.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (model construction): The central claim that sub-dominant modes are accurately incorporated rests on the fidelity of the twisting-up maps, yet the manuscript provides no mismatch values, phase-error budgets, or NR comparisons that isolate the contribution of these maps (or their degradation with inclination) to the (2,1), (3,3) and higher content.

    Authors: We agree that isolating the accuracy of the twisting-up maps for higher modes is important for supporting the central claims. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated discussion in §3 that includes mismatch values between the twisted-up higher modes and NR waveforms for representative cases, together with a brief phase-error budget. These new comparisons are shown as a function of inclination and demonstrate that the degradation remains within the expected range for the single-spin PN and double-spin MSA approximations used. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5] §5 (accuracy assessment): No quantitative validation metrics against numerical relativity are shown for the full IMRPhenomXPHM waveforms that would demonstrate the net improvement over IMRPhenomXP once the twisting-up approximations are applied to the higher modes from IMRPhenomXHM.

    Authors: We concur that explicit NR comparisons for the complete IMRPhenomXPHM model are needed to quantify the improvement gained by including higher modes. The revised §5 now contains additional mismatch tables and figures that directly compare full IMRPhenomXPHM waveforms against both IMRPhenomXP and available NR simulations for precessing binaries. These metrics highlight the net gain, especially at inclinations where sub-dominant modes contribute appreciably. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation to base model; twisting-up maps drawn from independent PN literature with no reduction to fitted inputs

full rationale

The paper constructs IMRPhenomXPHM as an extension of IMRPhenomXHM by applying twisting-up maps taken from external references (single-spin PN from Hannam 2013 and double-spin MSA from Chatziioannou 2017). Phenomenological coefficients are calibrated to numerical-relativity data external to the present work. The self-citation to García-Quirós 2020 supplies the aligned-spin base modes and an interpolation technique but does not define the precessing maps or force any claimed prediction by construction. No step equates a derived quantity to its own input via self-definition, fitted-parameter renaming, or load-bearing uniqueness imported from the same authors. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on fitted phenomenological coefficients calibrated to numerical relativity and on domain assumptions about the twisting-up procedure; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • phenomenological fitting coefficients
    Standard for IMRPhenom-family models; coefficients are adjusted to match numerical-relativity waveforms.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Approximate maps between aligned-spin modes and precessing inertial-frame modes via twisting-up are sufficiently accurate for the target applications.
    Invoked when constructing precessing waveforms from non-precessing IMRPhenomXHM modes.
  • domain assumption Single-spin PN and double-spin MSA approximations adequately capture the precession dynamics.
    Used as the two alternative rotation prescriptions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5630 in / 1514 out tokens · 39865 ms · 2026-05-13T21:50:36.494185+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 22 Pith papers

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

  1. GW240925 and GW250207: Astrophysical Calibration of Gravitational-wave Detectors

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    The first informative astrophysical calibration of gravitational-wave detectors is reported using GW240925 and GW250207.

  2. Testing the Kerr hypothesis beyond the quadrupole with GW241011

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    GW241011 data shows consistency with Kerr black holes for both quadrupole and octupole moments and delivers the first observational bounds on spin-induced octupole deviations.

  3. End-to-End Population Inference from Gravitational-Wave Strain using Transformers

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Dingo-Pop uses a transformer to perform amortized, end-to-end population inference from GW strain data in seconds, bypassing per-event Monte Carlo sampling.

  4. Constraining Dipole Radiation with Multiband Gravitational Waves from Eccentric Binary Black Holes

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Multiband observations of eccentric binary black holes can constrain dipole-radiation deviations from general relativity to |b| ≲ 10^{-7} for a GW231123-like event when combining one year of space-based data with grou...

  5. Lessons from binary dynamics of inspiralling equal-mass boson-star mergers

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Numerical simulations of equal-mass boson-star mergers reveal larger waveform deviations from black-hole binaries in late inspiral and merger, plus odd multipole excitations for certain scalar-field phases, with some ...

  6. How lonely are the Binary Compact Objects Detected by the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Collaboration?

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    No three-body encounter signatures detected in GW170817, GW190814, and GW230627_015337, constraining intermediate-mass black holes above 100 solar masses within roughly 0.1 AU of these binaries.

  7. Novel ringdown tests of general relativity with black hole greybody factors

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    GreyRing model based on greybody factors reproduces numerical relativity ringdown signals with mismatches of order 10^{-6} and enables a new post-merger consistency test of general relativity applied to GW250114.

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

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Neural network surrogate approximates precessing compact binary gravitational waveforms up to 1000x faster than the base EOB model with validated accuracy.

  9. All-order structure of static gravitational interactions and the seventh post-Newtonian potential

    hep-th 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A closed formula computes static post-Newtonian corrections at arbitrary odd orders in gravity, yielding the explicit seventh post-Newtonian potential that matches an independent diagrammatic method.

  10. GW231123: False Massive Graviton Signatures from Unmodeled Point-Mass Lensing

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Unmodeled point-mass lensing produces a spurious nonzero graviton mass posterior in GW231123 that vanishes when lensing is included in the analysis.

  11. Posterior Predictive Checks for Gravitational-wave Populations: Limitations and Improvements

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Maximum-likelihood-based posterior predictive checks detect model misspecification better than event-level versions for uncertain spin tilts, but current detector sensitivity limits their power; the Gaussian Component...

  12. The Impact of Spin Priors on Parameterized Tests of General Relativity

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Spin prior choices propagate into tests of GR via the 1.5PN deviation parameter δφ̂3 in a non-trivial, event-dependent way, with stronger effects for short-inspiral events and partial degeneracy with χ_eff when the de...

  13. Inference of recoil kicks from binary black hole mergers up to GWTC--4 and their astrophysical implications

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Recoil kicks are inferred for GWTC-4 binary black hole events with values up to nearly 1000 km/s for some, yielding retention probabilities of 1-5% in globular clusters and 70-100% in elliptical galaxies.

  14. GW250114: testing Hawking's area law and the Kerr nature of black holes

    gr-qc 2025-09 accept novelty 5.0

    GW250114 data confirm the remnant black hole ringdown frequencies lie within 30% of Kerr predictions and that the final horizon area is larger than the sum of the progenitors' areas to high credibility.

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

    gr-qc 2020-10 accept novelty 5.0

    No evidence for deviations from general relativity is found in LIGO-Virgo binary black hole events, with improved constraints on waveform parameters, graviton mass, and ringdown properties.

  16. Mitigating Systematic Errors in Parameter Estimation of Binary Black Hole Mergers in O1-O3 LIGO-Virgo Data

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Parametric models incorporating waveform phase and amplitude uncertainties mitigate systematic errors in gravitational wave parameter estimation, producing consistent results across models and raw/deglitched data for ...

  17. Gravitational-wave astronomy requires population-informed parameter estimation

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Population-informed hierarchical parameter estimation is required for unbiased astrophysical interpretation of gravitational-wave events rather than using standard individual posteriors with reference priors.

  18. GW190711_030756 and GW200114_020818: astrophysical interpretation of two asymmetric binary black hole mergers in the IAS catalog

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Two asymmetric BBH mergers are characterized with mass ratios 0.35 and ≤0.20; one shows high spins, negative χ_eff, and strong precession, suggesting an emerging population of massive rapidly spinning systems.

  19. Improved Constraints on Non-Kerr Deviations from Binary Black Hole Inspirals Using GWTC-4 Data

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    Bayesian constraints from GWTC-4 binary black hole inspirals show Johannsen metric deformation parameters α13 and ε3 consistent with zero, supporting the Kerr hypothesis.

  20. Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3

    gr-qc 2021-12 accept novelty 3.0

    No evidence for physics beyond general relativity is found in the analysis of 15 GW events from GWTC-3, with consistency in residuals, PN parameters, and remnant properties.

  21. Black hole spectroscopy: from theory to experiment

    gr-qc 2025-05 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    A review summarizing the state of the art in black hole quasinormal modes, ringdown waveform modeling, current LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA observations, and prospects for LISA and next-generation detectors.

  22. Signatures of a subpopulation of hierarchical mergers in the GWTC-4 gravitational-wave dataset

    gr-qc 2026-01

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

123 extracted references · 123 canonical work pages · cited by 22 Pith papers · 15 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    For GW150914 we use the nested sampling algorithm implemented in LALInference [12]

    GW150914 As a prototypical example of the application ofIMRPhe- nomXPHM to GW data analysis we re-analyze GW150914, the first direct observation of GWs from the merger of two black holes [26]. For GW150914 we use the nested sampling algorithm implemented in LALInference [12]. Our parameter estimation uses 2048 live points and coherently analyzes 8s of data...

    work page 2048

  2. [2]

    GW170729 We now turn our attention to the analysis of GW170729, the BBH GW signal with the highest mass detected during the O1 and O2 LIGO-Virgo observing runs [40]. Both the high mass and the significant posterior support for a mass ratio different from unity makes it a good candidate to test the impact of higher-order modes on the estimation of its parame...

    work page 2000

  3. [3]

    We useSXS:BBH:0143, a mass ratio 2 simula- tionwithpositive χeff andsmall χp,broadlyconsistentwiththe population of BBHs observed to date [98, 99]

    Numerical relativity injections We investigate parameter estimation biases that might affect Bayesian inference analyses withIMRPhenomXPHMby per- forming a zero-noise injection of a public binary black hole numerical relativity simulation from the first SXS waveform catalogue [65]. We useSXS:BBH:0143, a mass ratio 2 simula- tionwithpositive χeff andsmall χp,...

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    ℓ = 2, m′ = 2 d2 22(β) = cos4 β 2 , d2 12(β) = 2 cos 3 β 2 sin β 2 , d2 02(β) = √ 6 cos 2 β 2 sin2 β 2 , d2 −12(β) = 2 cos β 2 sin3 β 2 , 23 d2 −22(β) = sin4 β 2

    work page

  5. [5]

    ℓ = 2, m′ = 1 d2 21(β) =−2 cos 3 β 2 sin β 2 , d2 11(β) = cos2 β 2 ( cos2 β 2− 3 sin2 β 2 ) , d2 01(β) = √ 6 ( cos3 β 2 sin β 2− cos β 2 sin3 β 2 ) , d2 −11(β) = sin2 β 2 ( 3 cos2 β 2− sin2 β 2 ) , d2 −21(β) = 2 cos β 2 sin3 β 2

    work page

  6. [6]

    ℓ = 3, m′ = 3 d3 33(β) = cos6 β 2 , d3 23(β) = √ 6 cos 5 β 2 sin β 2 , d3 13(β) = √ 15 cos 4 β 2 sin2 β 2 , d3 03(β) = 2 √ 5 cos 3 β 2 sin3 β 2 , d3 −13(β) = √ 15 cos 2 β 2 sin4 β 2 , d3 −23(β) = √ 6 cos β 2 sin5 β 2 , d3 −33(β) = sin6 β 2

    work page

  7. [7]

    ℓ = 3, m′ = 2 d3 32(β) =− √ 6 cos 5 β 2 sin β 2 , d3 22(β) = cos4 β 2 ( cos2 β 2− 5 sin2 β 2 ) , d3 12(β) = √ 10 cos3 β 2 ( cos2 β 2 sin β 2− 2 sin3 β 2 ) d3 02(β) = √ 30 cos2 β 2 sin2 β 2 ( cos2 β 2− sin2 β 2 ) , d3 −12(β) = √ 10 sin3 β 2 ( 2 cos3 β 2− cos β 2 sin2 β 2 ) , d3 −22(β) = sin4 β 2 ( 5 cos2 β 2− sin2 β 2 ) , d3 −32(β) = √ 6 cos β 2 sin5 β 2

    work page

  8. [8]

    ℓ = 4, m′ = 4 d4 44(β) = cos8 β 2 , d4 34(β) = 2 √ 2 cos 7 β 2 sin β 2 , d4 24(β) = 2 √ 7 cos 6 β 2 sin2 β 2 , d4 14(β) = 2 √ 14 cos 5 β 2 sin3 β 2 , d4 04(β) = √ 70 cos 4 β 2 sin4 β 2 , d4 −14(β) = 2 √ 14 cos 3 β 2 sin5 β 2 , d4 −24(β) = 2 √ 7 cos 2 β 2 sin6 β 2 , d4 −34(β) = 2 √ 2 cos β 2 sin7 β 2 , d4 −44(β) = sin8 β 2

    work page

  9. [9]

    multibanding

    ℓ = 4, m′ = 3 d4 43(β) =−2 √ 2 sin (β 2 ) cos 7 (β 2 ) , d4 33(β) = cos8 (β 2 ) − 7 sin2 (β 2 ) cos6 (β 2 ) , d4 23(β) = √ 14 sin (β 2 ) cos7 (β 2 ) − 3 √ 14 sin3 (β 2 ) cos 5 (β 2 ) , d4 13(β) = 3 √ 7 sin2 (β 2 ) cos 6 (β 2 ) − 5 √ 7 sin4 (β 2 ) cos4 (β 2 ) , d4 03(β) = 2 √ 35 sin3 (β 2 ) cos 5 (β 2 ) − 2 √ 35 sin5 (β 2 ) cos3 (β 2 ) , d4 −13(β) = 5 √ 7 ...

    work page

  10. [10]

    The multibanding algorithm is parameterized by a threshold, which describes the permitted local interpolation error for the phase in radians

    to do the evaluation faster and can also use a custom list of modes specified by the user. The multibanding algorithm is parameterized by a threshold, which describes the permitted local interpolation error for the phase in radians. Lower values thus correspond to higher accuracy. The default multiband- ing threshold for computing the non-precessing modes ...

    work page

  11. [11]

    NNLO post-Newtonian Euler Angles For completeness we write out the explicit expressions for the Euler anglesα and ϵ, computed to NNLO accuracy for single spin systems as used in the single spin version of our model, see IVA. Bothαand ϵ have the same functional form as functions of the frequencyf, αNNLO (ω) = 1∑ i=−3 αi (π f M)i/3 + αlog log(π f M), (G7) ϵ...

    work page

  12. [12]

    We neglect spin-spin couplings

    Orbital Angular Momentum Theorbitalangularmomentumisestimatedusinganaligned- spinapproximationwithorbitaltermsupto4PNandspin-orbit terms up to 3.5PN. We neglect spin-spin couplings. L0 = 1, (G10a) L1 = η 6 + 3 2 , (G10b) L2 = η2 24− 19η 8 + 27 8 , (G10c) L3 = 7η3 1296 + 31η2 24 + (41π2 24 − 6889 144 ) η + 135 16 , (G10d) L4 =− 55η4 31104− 215η3 1728 + (35...

    work page

  13. [13]

    A simple model of complete precessing black-hole-binary gravitational waveforms

    M. Hannam, P. Schmidt, A. Bohé, L. Haegel, S. Husa,et al., Phys.Rev.Lett.113, 151101 (2014), arXiv:1308.3271 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  14. [14]

    Constructing Gravitational Waves from Generic Spin-Precessing Compact Binary Inspirals

    K. Chatziioannou, A. Klein, N. Yunes, and N. Cornish, Phys. Rev.D95, 104004 (2017), arXiv:1703.03967 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    C.García-Quirós,S.Husa,M.Mateu-Lucena, andA.Borchers, ArXiv e-prints (2020), arXiv:2001.10897 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    Pratten, S

    G. Pratten, S. Husa, C. Garcia-Quiros, M. Colleoni, A. Ramos- Buades, H. Estelles, and R. Jaume, ArXiv e-prints (2020), arXiv:2001.11412 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    S. Husa, S. Khan, M. Hannam, M. Pürrer, F. Ohme, X. Jiménez Forteza, and A. Bohé, Phys. Rev.D93, 044006 (2016), arXiv:1508.07250 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  18. [18]

    S. Khan, S. Husa, M. Hannam, F. Ohme, M. Pürrer, X. Jiménez Forteza, and A. Bohé, Phys. Rev.D93, 044007 (2016), arXiv:1508.07253 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    Hierarchical data-driven approach to fitting numerical relativity data for nonprecessing binary black holes with an application to final spin and radiated energy

    X. Jiménez-Forteza, D. Keitel, S. Husa, M. Hannam, S. Khan, and M. Pürrer, Phys. Rev.D95, 064024 (2017), arXiv:1611.00332 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    Keitel, X

    D. Keitel, X. J. Forteza, S. Husa, L. London, S. Bernuzzi, E. Harms, A. Nagar, M. Hannam, S. Khan, M. Pürrer, G. Prat- ten, and V. Chaurasia, Phys. Rev. D96, 024006 (2017), arXiv:1612.09566 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  21. [21]

    An improved effective-one-body model of spinning, nonprecessing binary black holes for the era of gravitational-wave astrophysics with advanced detectors

    A. Bohé et al. , Phys. Rev. D95, 044028 (2017), arXiv:1611.03703 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    García-Quirós, M

    C.García-Quirós, M. Colleoni, S. Husa, H.Estellés, G.Pratten, A. Ramos-Buades, M. Mateu-Lucena, and R. Jaume, ArXiv e-prints (2020), arXiv:2001.10914 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    First higher-multipole model of gravitational waves from spinning and coalescing black-hole binaries

    L. London, S. Khan, E. Fauchon-Jones, C. García, M. Han- nam, S. Husa, X. Jiménez-Forteza, C. Kalaghatgi, F. Ohme, and F. Pannarale, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 161102 (2018), arXiv:1708.00404 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  24. [24]

    Robust parameter estimation for compact binaries with ground-based gravitational-wave observations using the LALInference software library

    J. Veitch et al. , Phys. Rev. D91, 042003 (2015), arXiv:1409.7215 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  25. [25]

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

    G. Ashton et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. 241, 27 (2019), arXiv:1811.02042 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  26. [26]

    Vinciguerra, J

    S. Vinciguerra, J. Veitch, and I. Mandel, Class. Quant. Grav. 34, 115006 (2017), arXiv:1703.02062 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    S. Khan, K. Chatziioannou, M. Hannam, and F. Ohme, Phys. Rev.D100, 024059 (2019), arXiv:1809.10113 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    S. Khan, F. Ohme, K. Chatziioannou, and M. Hannam, Phys. Rev.D101, 024056 (2020), arXiv:1911.06050 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  29. [29]

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

    P.Schmidt, M. Hannam, S.Husa, andP. Ajith,Phys. Rev.D84, 024046 (2011), arXiv:1012.2879 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

  30. [30]

    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, Phys. Rev.D86, 104063 (2012), arXiv:1207.3088 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  31. [31]

    LIGO Algorithm Library - LALSuite,

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, “LIGO Algorithm Library - LALSuite,” free software (GPL), https://doi.org/10. 7935/GT1W-FZ16 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Precessional instability in binary black holes with aligned spins

    D. Gerosa, M. Kesden, R. O’Shaughnessy, A. Klein, E. Berti, U. Sperhake, and D. Trifirò, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 141102 (2015), arXiv:1506.09116 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  33. [33]

    Exploring black hole superkicks

    B. Bruegmann, J. A. Gonzalez, M. Hannam, S. Husa, and U. Sperhake, Phys. Rev.D77, 124047 (2008), arXiv:0707.0135 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  34. [34]

    Ramos-Buades, P

    A. Ramos-Buades, P. Schmidt, G. Pratten, and S. Husa, ArXiv e-prints (2020), arXiv:2001.10936 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  35. [35]

    L. M. Thomas, P. Schmidt, and G. Pratten, (2020), arXiv:2012.02209 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    A. Bohé, M. Hannam, S. Husa, F. Ohme, M. Puerrer, and P. Schmidt,PhenomPv2 - Technical Notes for LAL Implementa- tion, Tech. Rep. LIGO-T1500602 (LIGO Project, 2016)

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Class. Quant. Grav. 34, 104002 (2017), arXiv:1611.07531 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  38. [38]

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  39. [39]

    T. A. Apostolatos, C. Cutler, G. J. Sussman, and K. S. Thorne, Phys. Rev.D49, 6274 (1994)

    work page 1994

  40. [40]

    Coalescing binary systems of compact objects to (post)$^{5/2}-Newtonian order. V. Spin Effects

    L.E.Kidder,Phys.Rev. D52,821(1995),arXiv:gr-qc/9506022 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  41. [41]

    Schmidt, I

    P. Schmidt, I. W. Harry, and H. P. Pfeiffer, ArXiv e-prints (2017), arXiv:1703.01076 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  42. [42]

    K. S. Thorne, Rev. Mod. Phys.52, 299 (1980)

    work page 1980

  43. [43]

    J. N. Goldberg, A. J. MacFarlane, E. T. Newman, F. Rohrlich, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, J. Math. Phys.8, 2155 (1967)

    work page 1967

  44. [44]

    Fast spin +-2 spherical harmonics transforms and application in cosmology

    Y. Wiaux, L. Jacques, and P. Vandergheynst, J. Comput. Phys. 226, 2359 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0508514 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  45. [45]

    M.Boyle,R.Owen, andH.P.Pfeiffer,Phys.Rev.D 84,124011 (2011), arXiv:1110.2965 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

  46. [47]

    K. G. Arun, A. Buonanno, G. Faye, and E. Ochsner, Phys. Rev. D79, 104023 (2009), [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D84,049901(2011)], arXiv:0810.5336 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2009

  47. [48]

    Mathematica, Version 12.0,

    W. Inc., “Mathematica, Version 12.0,” (2019), Champaign, IL

    work page 2019

  48. [49]

    L. S. Finn and D. F. Chernoff, Phys. Rev.D47, 2198 (1993), arXiv:gr-qc/9301003 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  49. [50]

    Gravitational Waves from Mergin Compact Binaries: How Accurately Can One Extract the Binary's Parameters from the Inspiral Waveform?

    C. Cutler and E. E. Flanagan, Phys. Rev.D49, 2658 (1994), arXiv:gr-qc/9402014 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  50. [51]

    S. Droz, D. J. Knapp, E. Poisson, and B. J. Owen, Phys. Rev. D59, 124016 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9901076 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  51. [52]

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  52. [53]

    D84,064041 (2011), arXiv:1104.5659 [gr-qc]

    L.Blanchet,A.Buonanno, andG.Faye,Phys.Rev. D84,064041 (2011), arXiv:1104.5659 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  53. [54]

    Marsat, L

    S. Marsat, L. Blanchet, A. Bohe, and G. Faye (2013) arXiv:1312.5375 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  54. [55]

    Estell´ es, A

    H. Estellés, A. Ramos-Buades, S. Husa, C. García-Quirós, M.Colleoni,L.Haegel, andR.Jaume,“IMRPhenomTP:Aphe- nomenological time domain model for dominant quadrupole gravitational wave signal of coalescing binary black holes,” (2020), arXiv:2004.08302 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  55. [56]

    Towards models of gravitational waveforms from generic binaries II: Modelling precession effects with a single effective precession parameter

    P.Schmidt,F.Ohme, andM.Hannam,Phys.Rev. D91,024043 (2015), arXiv:1408.1810 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  56. [57]

    C. M. Bender and O. S. A.,Advanced Mathematical Methods of Scientists and Engineers I, Asymptotic Methods and Pertur- bation Theory(Springer, New York, 1999). 33

    work page 1999

  57. [58]

    Analysis of spin precession in binary black hole systems including quadrupole-monopole interaction

    E. Racine, Phys. Rev.D78, 044021 (2008), arXiv:0803.1820 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  58. [59]

    Klein, N

    A. Klein, N. Cornish, and N. Yunes, Phys. Rev.D88, 124015 (2013), arXiv:1305.1932 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  59. [60]

    M.Kesden,D.Gerosa,R.O’Shaughnessy,E.Berti, andU.Sper- hake, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 081103 (2015), arXiv:1411.0674 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  60. [61]

    Chatziioannou, A

    K. Chatziioannou, A. Klein, N. Yunes, and N. Cornish, Phys. Rev.D88, 063011 (2013), arXiv:1307.4418 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  61. [62]

    Klein, N

    A. Klein, N. Cornish, and N. Yunes, Phys. Rev.D90, 124029 (2014), arXiv:1408.5158 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  62. [63]

    Cabero, A

    M. Cabero, A. B. Nielsen, A. P. Lundgren, and C. D. Capano, Phys. Rev.D95, 064016 (2017), arXiv:1602.03134 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  63. [64]

    Blanchet, Living Rev

    L. Blanchet, Living Rev. Rel.9, 4 (2006)

    work page 2006

  64. [65]

    Le Tiec, L

    A. Le Tiec, L. Blanchet, and B. F. Whiting, Phys. Rev.D85, 064039 (2012), arXiv:1111.5378 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2012

  65. [66]

    A. Bohe, S. Marsat, G. Faye, and L. Blanchet, Class. Quant. Grav.30, 075017 (2013), arXiv:1212.5520 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2013

  66. [67]

    Nonlocal-in-time action for the fourth post-Newtonian conservative dynamics of two-body systems

    T. Damour, P. Jaranowski, and G. Schäfer, Phys. Rev.D89, 064058 (2014), arXiv:1401.4548 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  67. [68]

    Bernard, L

    L. Bernard, L. Blanchet, G. Faye, and T. Marchand, Phys. Rev. D97, 044037 (2018), arXiv:1711.00283 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2018

  68. [69]

    Blanchet and A

    L. Blanchet and A. Le Tiec, Class. Quant. Grav.34, 164001 (2017), arXiv:1702.06839 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  69. [70]

    Marsat, Class

    S. Marsat, Class. Quant. Grav. 32, 085008 (2015), arXiv:1411.4118 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  70. [71]

    Vines and J

    J. Vines and J. Steinhoff, Phys. Rev.D97, 064010 (2018), arXiv:1606.08832 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2018

  71. [72]

    Siemonsen, J

    N. Siemonsen, J. Steinhoff, and J. Vines, Phys. Rev.D97, 124046 (2018), arXiv:1712.08603 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2018

  72. [73]

    Ohme, and S

    N.K.Johnson-McDaniel,A.Gupta,P.Ajith,D.Keitel,O.Birn- holtz, F. Ohme, and S. Husa,Determining the final spin of a binary black hole system including in-plane spins: Method and checks of accuracy, Tech. Rep. LIGO-T1600168 (LIGO, 2016) https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1600168/public/main

    work page 2016

  73. [74]

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

    V. Varma, D. Gerosa, L. C. Stein, F. Hébert, and H. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 011101 (2019), arXiv:1809.09125 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  74. [75]

    On the final spin from the coalescence of two black holes

    L. Rezzolla, E. Barausse, E. N. Dorband, D. Pollney, C. Reis- swig, J. Seiler, and S. Husa, Phys. Rev.D78, 044002 (2008), arXiv:0712.3541 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  75. [76]

    Boyleet al., Class

    M. Boyle et al., Class. Quant. Grav. 36, 195006 (2019), arXiv:1904.04831 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  76. [77]

    SXS Gravitational Waveform Database,

    SXS Collaboration, “SXS Gravitational Waveform Database,” https://www.black-holes.org/waveforms (2019)

    work page 2019

  77. [78]

    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, andH.P.Pfeiffer,Phys.Rev.Research. 1, 033015 (2019), arXiv:1905.09300 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2019

  78. [79]

    Advanced LIGO

    J. Aasiet al.(LIGO Scientific), Class. Quant. Grav.32, 074001 (2015), arXiv:1411.4547 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  79. [80]

    L.Barsotti,P.Fritschel,M.Evans, andS.Gras, TheupdatedAd- vancedLIGOdesigncurve ,Tech.Rep.LIGO-T1800044(LIGO Project, 2018)

    work page 2018

  80. [82]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wil- son, K. Jarrod Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. Carey, İ. Polat, Y. Feng, E. W. Moore, J. VanderPlas, D. Laxalde, J. Perktold, R. Cimrman, I. Hen- r...

    work page 2020

Showing first 80 references.