pith. sign in

arxiv: 2506.09470 · v3 · submitted 2025-06-11 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE

The Fast and the Frame-Dragging: Efficient waveforms for asymmetric-mass eccentric equatorial inspirals into rapidly-spinning black holes

Christian E. A. Chapman-Bird , Lorenzo Speri , Zachary Nasipak , Ollie Burke , Michael L. Katz , Alessandro Santini , Shubham Kejriwal , Philip Lynch
show 8 more authors
Josh Mathews Hassan Khalvati Jonathan E. Thompson Soichiro Isoyama Scott A. Hughes Niels Warburton Alvin J. K. Chua Maxime Pigou
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 10:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HE
keywords gravitational wavesextreme mass ratio inspiralsblack hole spinwaveform modelingLISAeccentric orbitsadiabatic approximationintermediate mass ratio inspirals
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

Extending the FastEMRIWaveforms framework produces accurate eccentric inspiral waveforms into black holes with spins up to 0.999 in about 100 milliseconds.

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

This paper extends the FastEMRIWaveforms framework to generate waveforms for eccentric equatorial inspirals into black holes with high spin. The extension covers eccentricities below 0.9 and semi-latus recta up to 200, allowing computation of long-duration signals from intermediate-mass-ratio inspirals. Waveforms are generated in roughly 100 milliseconds with hardware acceleration while keeping mismatches around 10 to the minus 5 relative to adiabatic calculations for LISA sensitivities. Accurate and rapid modeling matters because future detectors like LISA will observe many such asymmetric-mass systems, where spin and eccentricity affect signal strength and parameter recovery.

Core claim

We extend FEW to model eccentric equatorial inspirals into black holes with spin magnitudes |a| ≤ 0.999. Our model supports eccentricities e < 0.9 and semi-latus recta p < 200, enabling the generation of long-duration IMRI waveforms, and produces waveforms in ∼100 ms with hardware acceleration. Characterising systematic errors, we estimate that our model attains mismatches of ∼10^{-5} (for LISA sensitivity) with respect to error-free adiabatic waveforms over most of parameter space.

What carries the argument

Precomputed mode data and interpolation techniques generalized from zero-spin cases to rapidly spinning black holes inside the FastEMRIWaveforms framework.

If this is right

  • Long-duration intermediate-mass-ratio inspiral waveforms become feasible to generate efficiently.
  • Hardware-accelerated computation reaches roughly 100 milliseconds per waveform.
  • Mismatches stay near 10 to the minus 5 for LISA sensitivities over most of the covered parameter space.
  • Kludge models produce signal-to-noise ratio errors as large as 60 percent and parameter biases up to one sigma.
  • LISA detection horizons reach redshift 3 for extreme-mass-ratio cases and 15 for intermediate-mass-ratio cases at signal-to-noise ratio 20, with spin measurable to 10 to the minus 7.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • These waveforms could support real-time matched filtering in LISA data analysis pipelines.
  • Similar interpolation strategies might extend to inclined or non-equatorial orbits with modest additional precomputation.
  • High-precision spin and eccentricity recovery could tighten constraints on formation channels for stellar-mass black holes near galactic centers.
  • Direct comparison against self-force calculations at selected high-spin points would test the adiabatic approximation used here.

Load-bearing premise

Interpolation methods and mode data developed for non-spinning black holes can be applied to high-spin cases while keeping mismatches at the reported level without new unquantified errors.

What would settle it

An independent computation of adiabatic waveforms for spin 0.99, eccentricity 0.8, and semi-latus rectum 50 that yields a mismatch above 10 to the minus 5 with the model output would falsify the accuracy claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.09470 by Alessandro Santini, Alvin J. K. Chua, Christian E. A. Chapman-Bird, Hassan Khalvati, Jonathan E. Thompson, Josh Mathews, Lorenzo Speri, Maxime Pigou, Michael L. Katz, Niels Warburton, Ollie Burke, Philip Lynch, Scott A. Hughes, Shubham Kejriwal, Soichiro Isoyama, Zachary Nasipak.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Waveform for a retrograde eccentric EMRI into a spinning MBH in the frequency (upper-left), time-frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Continuous solutions for the orbital phase, fre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Trajectory characteristics as a function of ODE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top panel: The blue curve represents a highly eccentric and equatorial inspiral trajectory for ϵ = 10−5 and a = 0.998. The black dotted line describes separatrix psep, which evolves as a function of eccentricity. The orange diamonds represent individual snapshots of the trajectory. Bottom panel: A plot of the mode spectrum normalised by the total mode power P (p=2,e=0.09) ℓmn,tot at the points in the traje… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Relative error in ˆf (0) p between an interpolation of our data grid and the corresponding data of Ref. [136], avail￾able from the BHPC data lake [230]. The two datasets agree to better than 8 digits over the majority of the parameter space. Here we examine prograde orbits with a = 0.5; we ob￾serve similar agreement for other spin values a ∈ [−0.9, 0.9]. tories is wholly dependent on the accuracy to which … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Relative error in ˆf (0) p between an interpolation of our data grid and a dataset computed with the GREM￾LIN code. The four panels shown correspond to four slices in eccentricity that follow the tapering scheme described in Appendix B. The two datasets generally agree to∼ 6 digits for p−psep ≳ 10−2 , increasing to ∼ 4 digits below this value. Some data quality issues are also evident in the lower right pa… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Relative error in ˆf (0) p between data grid values and those obtained via interpolation over this grid down-sampled by a factor of 2 (denoted “FEW” and “FEW/2”). The relative errors shown provide an upper bound on the interpolation error incurred by the full-resolution interpolant. Shown is a slice in (p, e) with a = 0.9985, which is the spin value for which our interpolant is the most inaccurate. the par… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Dephasing due to down-sampling of ˆf (0) p,e inter￾polant data grids for a sample of 103 four-year inspirals. In all cases, dashed vertical lines indicate median values. Top panel: Convergence of dephasing when one down-samples by a factor of either 2 1 (blue), 2 2 (yellow), or 2 3 (green) in all grid dimensions; the red dashed histogram is obtained by extrapolating down-sampled phase errors to the full gr… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mode amplitude (approximate) mismatch Mamp (Eq. (14)) between interpolated amplitudes from our model (A FEW ℓmn ) and those produced with the GREMLIN code (A SAH ℓmn ). Mismatch due to amplitude interpolation error in￾creases significantly as p decreases below ∼ psep + 1, and is slightly worse for higher eccentricities. This behaviour is due to our linear interpolation of amplitudes with respect to a (expl… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Relative difference between bicubic+linear [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Similar to the top panel of Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Mismatches between waveforms computed with models using full-resolution (h 1DS) and half-resolution (h 2DS) forcing function data grids (blue histogram in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparisons between waveforms constructed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Wall-time of waveform generation with few in either the TD (blue) or FD (orange) output domains, for 104 randomly-sampled sets of source parameters. We show wall-times for κ = 10−5 (dashed line) and κ = 10−2 (solid line) to explore the impact of waveform mode content on computational costs. The sampling interval is chosen to be dt = 5 s, with all inspirals plunging after four years. A. Waveform computatio… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Ratio of the optimal SNRs computed with the semi-relativistic AAK mode amplitude model (ρAAK) and the adiabatic model presented in this work (ρKerr), as a function of initial eccentricity e0 ∈ [0, 0.7] and primary spin a ∈ [0, 0.998]. For all systems, we consider four-year inspirals with masses (m1, m2) = (106 , 10) M⊙. Waveforms for both models are built with the same adiabatic trajectory model (Section … view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Distribution of sigma contour levels DMaha of the best-fit θbf parameters with respect to the truths θtr visualized on a grid of a and e0 values. At each gridpoint (black circles), the injected signal is generated using the de￾fault model and inferred with the approximate Kerrℓ2 (top panel) and AAK (bottom panel) waveforms as described in the text, showing the impact of higher-multipole (ℓ > 2) and relati… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Here we show the evolution of the horizon redshift [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Mismatches (blue dots) between quasi-circular [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Time-domain snapshots of the science-case waveforms described in Table [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Visualization of the flux grid domains, plotted [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: The number of CPU minutes required to calculate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_21.png] view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Absolute value of the final orbital phase [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_22.png] view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Comparison of the real part of the mode ampli [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_23.png] view at source ↗
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Mismatch between our waveform and Ker￾rCirc (solid line) or BHPWave (dashed line) as a func￾tion of the primary spin a, in the circular orbit limit. Mis￾matches were computed using a flat PSD, with a four-year observation time before plunge (i.e. reaching the innermost stable circular orbit). The source parameters were fixed at (M, µ) = (106 , 10), M⊙, and an arbitrary viewing configura￾tion with (θ, ϕ) =… view at source ↗
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: The relative error in ˆf (0) p,e between the interpo￾lated forcing function in this work (few, ˆf FEW p,e ) and the PN forcing function in Appendix E 2 (PN5, ˆf PN5 p,e ) in the weak￾field for a = 0.998 (we find similar behaviour for other values of a). have corrected minor typos in the (adiabatic) PN5 fluxes of the angular momentum and Carter constant and the associated PN5 forcing functions ˆf PN5 p,e .… view at source ↗
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: Absolute relative error for three selected modes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p049_26.png] view at source ↗
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: (From left to right): Orbital dephasings between the trajectory model presented in this work (Kerr) and the PN trajectory discussed in Appendix E 2 (PN5) for m1 ∈ {105 , 106 , 107 } M⊙. All inspirals are evolved for 4 years, with a = 0.998 and ϵ = 10−5 . The white dashed contours indicate regions where the dephasing crosses {0.01, 0.1, 1} rad. The blue dashed line indicates the outer boundary in (p0, e0) … view at source ↗
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: Posterior distributions of the intrinsic parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_28.png] view at source ↗
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: Posterior distributions of the intrinsic parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_29.png] view at source ↗
Figure 32
Figure 32. Figure 32: Posterior distributions for an IMRI with parameters given in the third row of Table [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_32.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Observations of gravitational-wave signals emitted by compact binary inspirals provide unique insights into their properties, but their analysis requires accurate and efficient waveform models. Intermediate- and extreme-mass-ratio inspirals (I/EMRIs), with mass ratios $q \gtrsim 10^2$, are promising sources for future detectors such as the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA). Modelling waveforms for these asymmetric-mass binaries is challenging, entailing the tracking of many harmonic modes over thousands to millions of cycles. The FastEMRIWaveforms (FEW) modelling framework addresses this need, leveraging precomputation of mode data and interpolation to rapidly compute adiabatic waveforms for eccentric inspirals into zero-spin black holes. In this work, we extend FEW to model eccentric equatorial inspirals into black holes with spin magnitudes $|a| \leq 0.999$. Our model supports eccentricities $e < 0.9$ and semi-latus recta $p < 200$, enabling the generation of long-duration IMRI waveforms, and produces waveforms in $\sim 100$ ms with hardware acceleration. Characterising systematic errors, we estimate that our model attains mismatches of $\sim 10^{-5}$ (for LISA sensitivity) with respect to error-free adiabatic waveforms over most of parameter space. We find that kludge models introduce errors in signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) as great as $^{+60\%}_{-40\%}$ and induce marginal biases of up to $\sim 1\sigma$ in parameter estimation. We show LISA's horizon redshift for I/EMRI signals varies significantly with $a$, reaching a redshift of $3$ ($15$) for EMRIs (IMRIs) with only minor $(\sim10\%)$ dependence on $e$ for an SNR threshold of 20. For signals with SNR $\sim 50$, spin and eccentricity-at-plunge are measured with uncertainties of $\delta a \sim 10^{-7}$ and $\delta e_f \sim 10^{-5}$. This work advances the state-of-the-art in waveform generation for asymmetric-mass binaries.

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 extends the FastEMRIWaveforms (FEW) framework from zero-spin to Kerr black holes with |a| ≤ 0.999, enabling efficient generation of adiabatic waveforms for eccentric equatorial inspirals with e < 0.9 and p < 200. Waveforms are produced in ~100 ms using hardware acceleration. The central claims are that the model attains mismatches of ~10^{-5} (LISA sensitivity) relative to error-free adiabatic waveforms over most of parameter space, that kludge models induce SNR errors up to +60%/-40% and ~1σ parameter biases, and that LISA horizon redshifts and measurement precisions (e.g., δa ~ 10^{-7}) vary with spin and eccentricity.

Significance. If the mismatch and performance claims hold, the work is significant for LISA data analysis of I/EMRIs, as it supplies a practical, fast waveform generator for long-duration signals into spinning primaries and quantifies systematic errors from kludge approximations. The extension of precomputed-mode interpolation to high spins, together with concrete horizon and precision estimates, would be a useful contribution to the EMRI modeling literature.

major comments (2)
  1. The mismatch characterization (abstract and the section on systematic errors) states ~10^{-5} levels with respect to error-free adiabatic waveforms but supplies no quantitative details on the validation data sets, error-bar propagation, or handling of post-adiabatic corrections. This is load-bearing for the central performance claim, because the generalization of zero-spin precomputed mode amplitudes, phases, and frequencies to |a| ≈ 0.999 must be shown to preserve accuracy when radial potentials and frame-dragging frequencies change sharply near the ISCO.
  2. Model construction (section describing the extension of precomputed data and interpolation): the manuscript should clarify whether the reported mismatches were obtained by comparison against an independent high-fidelity adiabatic integrator for the spinning case or whether they are internal comparisons between two versions of the same interpolated model. Without the former, phase-error accumulation over thousands of LISA-band cycles remains unquantified.
minor comments (2)
  1. Figure captions and axis labels should explicitly state the range of spin values sampled and the interpolation method used for each panel.
  2. A short table summarizing the grid spacing in (a, e, p) for the precomputed modes would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which help us improve the clarity of our validation procedures. We respond to each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The mismatch characterization (abstract and the section on systematic errors) states ~10^{-5} levels with respect to error-free adiabatic waveforms but supplies no quantitative details on the validation data sets, error-bar propagation, or handling of post-adiabatic corrections. This is load-bearing for the central performance claim, because the generalization of zero-spin precomputed mode amplitudes, phases, and frequencies to |a| ≈ 0.999 must be shown to preserve accuracy when radial potentials and frame-dragging frequencies change sharply near the ISCO.

    Authors: We agree that the current presentation would benefit from additional quantitative detail. In the revised manuscript we will expand the relevant section to include a table describing the validation data sets (a dense grid covering |a| up to 0.999, e < 0.9 and p < 200), the precise method of error-bar propagation from the underlying Teukolsky solutions through the interpolation, and explicit statements that the model is strictly adiabatic. We will add a short discussion noting that post-adiabatic corrections lie outside the present scope and a supplementary figure showing mode amplitudes and frequencies near the ISCO at high spin to confirm that the precomputed data remain well-behaved in this regime. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Model construction (section describing the extension of precomputed data and interpolation): the manuscript should clarify whether the reported mismatches were obtained by comparison against an independent high-fidelity adiabatic integrator for the spinning case or whether they are internal comparisons between two versions of the same interpolated model. Without the former, phase-error accumulation over thousands of LISA-band cycles remains unquantified.

    Authors: We will revise the model-construction section to state explicitly that the reference 'error-free' waveforms are generated by a direct numerical Teukolsky integrator that solves the radial and angular equations for each mode without recourse to the precomputed interpolation tables used in the FEW model. This constitutes an independent high-fidelity computation. We will also report the number of LISA-band cycles (typically 10^4–10^5) over which phase differences were accumulated and the resulting maximum phase error, thereby quantifying the accumulation explicitly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation in FEW framework extension; central mismatch claims rest on external kludge comparisons rather than self-referential fits

full rationale

The paper extends the existing FEW precomputation and interpolation machinery (developed for a=0) to |a|≤0.999 by reusing grids and schemes, then reports mismatches against 'error-free adiabatic waveforms'. No equation or section reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, nor does any load-bearing uniqueness theorem trace exclusively to overlapping-author citations. Comparisons to independent kludge models are cited for SNR and bias checks, supplying external benchmarks. This keeps the derivation self-contained against the reported external validations, warranting only a minor self-citation flag.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the adiabatic approximation for the inspiral and on the transferability of zero-spin precomputed mode tables to spinning cases; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Adiabatic approximation remains valid for the eccentric equatorial inspirals considered
    Invoked when the paper states that the model produces adiabatic waveforms and compares them to error-free adiabatic references.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 6006 in / 1460 out tokens · 44027 ms · 2026-05-19T10:02:48.803342+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 14 Pith papers

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

  1. First-time assessment of glitch-induced bias and uncertainty in inference of extreme mass ratio inspirals

    gr-qc 2025-12 accept novelty 7.0

    Moderately mitigated glitch streams induce negligible to minor biases (0.04–0.6σ) in EMRI parameters while weakly mitigated streams with higher-SNR events can reach ~1σ biases, making EMRI inference more robust than f...

  2. Black hole mergers beyond general relativity: a self-force approach

    gr-qc 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Self-force theory is extended to compute merger and ringdown waveforms in beyond-GR black hole binaries under the extreme mass-ratio approximation, with first calculations of self-force corrections to the merger waveform.

  3. Efficient and Stable Computation of Gravitational-Wave Fluxes from Generic Kerr Orbits via a Unified HeunC Framework

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A unified confluent HeunC framework computes gravitational-wave fluxes from generic Kerr orbits with 10^{-11} relative errors and speedups of 3-60x over existing packages for low- and high-order modes.

  4. Efficient and Stable Computation of Gravitational-Wave Fluxes from Generic Kerr Orbits via a Unified HeunC Framework

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A unified confluent HeunC framework with hybrid connection-coefficient computation and adaptive bi-power quadrature yields relative errors of order 10^{-11} and 2-10x speedups over existing packages for total radiativ...

  5. Relativistic signatures of scalar dark matter in extreme-mass-ratio inspirals

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Relativistic metric backreaction from scalar dark matter clouds in EMRIs produces dominant polar gravitational wave corrections for Mμ ≲ 0.12, exceeding axial and scalar radiation channels at small separations.

  6. Post-adiabatic self-force waveforms: slowly spinning primary and precessing secondary

    gr-qc 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Extended 1PA self-force waveforms for slowly spinning primary and precessing secondary, with re-summed 1PAT1R variant showing improved accuracy against NR for q ≳ 5 and |χ1| ≲ 0.1.

  7. Probing Kerr Symmetry Breaking with LISA Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    LISA EMRIs can constrain deviations from Kerr equatorial symmetry to 10^{-2} and axial symmetry to 10^{-3} using Analytic Kludge waveforms and Fisher analysis.

  8. Gravitational radiation from hyperbolic orbits: comparison between self-force, post-Minkowskian, post-Newtonian, and numerical relativity results

    gr-qc 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Self-force calculations of radiated gravitational wave energy from hyperbolic orbits around Schwarzschild black holes agree with post-Minkowskian results for large impact parameters and velocities up to 0.7c, with fur...

  9. Systematic errors in fast relativistic waveforms for Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals

    gr-qc 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0

    For high-spin Kerr circular orbits, l_max >=30 and Chebyshev interpolation with global relative flux error matching the mass ratio yield mismatches below 10^{-3} and negligible parameter biases in 4-year EMRI signals ...

  10. Constraints on the extreme mass-ratio inspiral population from LISA data

    gr-qc 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A neural-network-accelerated hierarchical Bayesian pipeline is developed and validated on a phenomenological model to constrain EMRI population parameters from LISA data.

  11. A multi-parameter expansion for the evolution of asymmetric binaries in astrophysical environments

    gr-qc 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A multi-parameter formalism is developed to describe asymmetric binaries in general matter distributions by perturbing around Schwarzschild and reducing metric and fluid perturbations to wave equations similar to the ...

  12. Constraining Lorentz symmetry breaking in bumblebee gravity with extreme mass-ratio inspirals

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Extreme mass-ratio inspirals can constrain the Lorentz symmetry breaking parameter ℓ in bumblebee gravity to O(10^{-4}) uncertainty with LISA.

  13. Constraining Lorentz symmetry breaking in bumblebee gravity with extreme mass-ratio inspirals

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    EMRI waveforms in bumblebee gravity allow LISA to constrain the Lorentz symmetry breaking parameter ell at the level of O(10^{-4}).

  14. The Early Career Workshop of GR-Amaldi 2025

    physics.soc-ph 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 1.0

    The paper reports on the aims, activities, and conclusions of an early-career workshop focused on scientific overviews, transferable skills, and networking in gravitational physics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

295 extracted references · 295 canonical work pages · cited by 12 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Newtonian-circular

    Weak-field behaviour against PN-GSF approaches The combined PN-GSF approach of black hole per- turbation theory yields closed-form analytic solutions to the (frequency-domain) Teukolsky equation and thus the inspiral forcing functions in Eq. (2) and the GW strain amplitudes in Eq. (5) in turn; we refer a reader to Refs. [138, 139] for reviews. In the cont...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Validating the interpolations of the forcing func- tions ˆf(0) p,e in the trajectory module against their PN5 equivalents (Fig. 25)

    work page

  3. [3]

    (6) and projected onto spherical harmonics as described in Eq

    Validating the interpolations of the mode ampli- tudes Aℓmn against their PN5 equivalents for sam- ple harmonic modes; the PN5 spherical harmonic waveform mode amplitudes were obtained from thePN5Teukolskyspheroidalharmonicmodeam- plitudes via Eq. (6) and projected onto spherical harmonics as described in Eq. (11) (Fig. 26)

    work page

  4. [4]

    Assessing the orbital dephasing (over four years) between the (fully-relativistic) trajectory model in few v2 and the PN5 inspiral model scales(Fig. 27). To do this, we have since implemented two minor im- provements to the PN5 trajectory module. Firstly, we 11 There are a number of other PN-GSF calculations that explic- itly consider the eccentric equato...

    work page arXiv 2002

  5. [5]

    GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coales- cences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Sec- ond Part of the Third Observing Run,

    R. Abbottet al., “GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coales- cences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Sec- ond Part of the Third Observing Run,”Phys. Rev. X, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 041039, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Advanced LIGO,

    J. Aasiet al., “Advanced LIGO,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 32, p. 074001, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Advanced Virgo: a second- generation interferometric gravitational wave detec- tor,

    F. Acernese et al., “Advanced Virgo: a second- generation interferometric gravitational wave detec- tor,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 32, no. 2, p. 024001, 2015

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    KAGRA: 2.5 Generation Interfero- metric Gravitational Wave Detector,

    T. Akutsuet al., “KAGRA: 2.5 Generation Interfero- metric Gravitational Wave Detector,”Nature Astron., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 35–40, 2019

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    Population of Merging Compact Binaries Inferred Using Gravitational Waves through GWTC-3,

    R. Abbott et al., “Population of Merging Compact Binaries Inferred Using Gravitational Waves through GWTC-3,”Phys. Rev. X, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 011048, 2023

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Surrogatemodelsforprecessingbinaryblackholesim- ulations with unequal masses,

    V. Varma, S. E. Field, M. A. Scheel, J. Blackman, D. Gerosa, L. C. Stein, L. E. Kidder, and H. P. Pfeiffer, “Surrogatemodelsforprecessingbinaryblackholesim- ulations with unequal masses,”Phys. Rev. Research., vol. 1, p. 033015, 2019

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    Next generation of accurate and efficient multipolar precessing-spin effective-one-body waveforms for binary black holes,

    A. Ramos-Buades, A. Buonanno, H. Estellés, M. Khalil, D. P. Mihaylov, S. Ossokine, L. Pompili, and M. Shiferaw, “Next generation of accurate and efficient multipolar precessing-spin effective-one-body waveforms for binary black holes,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 108, no. 12, p. 124037, 2023

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    Computationally efficient models for the dominant and subdominant harmonic modes of precessing binary black holes,

    G. Pratten et al., “Computationally efficient models for the dominant and subdominant harmonic modes of precessing binary black holes,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 103, no. 10, p. 104056, 2021

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,

    N. Afshordiet al., “Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,”ArXiv e-prints, 11 2023

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    GW190814: Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 23 Solar Mass Black Hole with a 2.6 Solar Mass Compact Object,

    R. Abbott et al., “GW190814: Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 23 Solar Mass Black Hole with a 2.6 Solar Mass Compact Object,”Astrophys. J. Lett., vol. 896, no. 2, p. L44, 2020

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Observation of Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 2.5–4.5 M⊙ Compact Ob- ject and a Neutron Star,

    A. G. Abacet al., “Observation of Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 2.5–4.5 M⊙ Compact Ob- ject and a Neutron Star,”Astrophys. J. Lett., vol. 970, no. 2, p. L34, 2024

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    GW190412: Observation of a Binary-Black-Hole Coalescence with Asymmetric Masses,

    R. Abbott et al. , “GW190412: Observation of a Binary-Black-Hole Coalescence with Asymmetric Masses,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 102, no. 4, p. 043015, 2020

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    The Einstein Telescope: A third- generation gravitational wave observatory,

    M. Punturoet al., “The Einstein Telescope: A third- generation gravitational wave observatory,” Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 27, p. 194002, 2010

    work page 2010

  18. [18]

    Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribu- tion to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO,

    D. Reitzeet al., “Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribu- tion to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO,” Bull. Am. Astron. Soc., vol. 51, no. 7, p. 035, 2019

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    The missing link in gravitational- wave astronomy: discoveries waiting in the decihertz range,

    M. A. Seddaet al., “The missing link in gravitational- wave astronomy: discoveries waiting in the decihertz range,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 37, no. 21, p. 215011, 2020

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Possibility of direct measurement of the acceleration of the uni- verse using 0.1-Hz band laser interferometer gravita- tionalwaveantenna inspace,

    N. Seto, S. Kawamura, and T. Nakamura, “Possibility of direct measurement of the acceleration of the uni- verse using 0.1-Hz band laser interferometer gravita- tionalwaveantenna inspace,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 87, p. 221103, 2001

    work page 2001

  21. [21]

    Pre-DECIGO can get the smok- ing gun to decide the astrophysical or cosmological ori- gin of GW150914-like binary black holes,

    T. Nakamuraet al., “Pre-DECIGO can get the smok- ing gun to decide the astrophysical or cosmological ori- gin of GW150914-like binary black holes,”PTEP, vol. 2016, no. 9, p. 093E01, 2016

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Current status of space grav- itational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO,

    S. Kawamura et al., “Current status of space grav- itational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO,” PTEP, vol. 2021, no. 5, p. 05A105, 2021

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Lunar Gravitational-Wave Detec- tion,

    M. Branchesiet al., “Lunar Gravitational-Wave Detec- tion,”Space Sci. Rev., vol. 219, no. 8, p. 67, 2023

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Astrophysics, detection and science applications of intermediate- and extreme mass-ratio inspirals,

    P. Amaro-Seoane, J. R. Gair, M. Freitag, M. Cole- man Miller, I. Mandel, C. J. Cutler, and S. Babak, “Astrophysics, detection and science applications of intermediate- and extreme mass-ratio inspirals,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 24, pp. R113–R169, 2007

    work page 2007

  25. [25]

    LISADefinitionStudyReport,

    M.Colpi et al., “LISADefinitionStudyReport,”ArXiv e-prints, 2 2024

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    The TianQin project: current progress on science and technology,

    J. Meiet al., “The TianQin project: current progress on science and technology,”PTEP, vol. 2021, no. 5, p. 05A107, 2021

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    The Taiji program: A concise overview,

    Z. Luo, Y. Wang, Y. Wu, W. Hu, and G. Jin, “The Taiji program: A concise overview,”PTEP, vol. 2021, no. 5, p. 05A108, May 2021

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Conceptsandstatusof Chinese space gravitational wave detection projects,

    Y.Gong, J.Luo, andB.Wang, “Conceptsandstatusof Chinese space gravitational wave detection projects,” Nature Astron., vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 881–889, 2021

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    Relativistic dynamics and extreme mass ratio inspirals,

    P. Amaro-Seoane, “Relativistic dynamics and extreme mass ratio inspirals,”Living Rev. Rel., vol. 21, no. 1, p. 4, 2018

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    Extremely large mass-ratio inspirals,

    ——, “Extremely large mass-ratio inspirals,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 99, no. 12, p. 123025, 2019

    work page 2019

  31. [31]

    Gravitational waves from bodies or- biting the Galactic Center black hole and their de- tectability by LISA,

    E. Gourgoulhon, A. Le Tiec, F. H. Vincent, and N. Warburton, “Gravitational waves from bodies or- biting the Galactic Center black hole and their de- tectability by LISA,”Astron. Astrophys., vol. 627, p. A92, 2019

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Science with the space- based interferometer LISA. V: Extreme mass-ratio in- spirals,

    S. Babak, J. Gair, A. Sesana, E. Barausse, C. F. Sop- uerta, C. P. L. Berry, E. Berti, P. Amaro-Seoane, A. Petiteau, and A. Klein, “Science with the space- based interferometer LISA. V: Extreme mass-ratio in- spirals,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 95, no. 10, p. 103012, 2017

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    The unique potential of extreme mass-ratio inspirals for gravitational-wave astronomy,

    C. P. L. Berry, S. A. Hughes, C. F. Sopuerta, A. J. K. Chua, A. Heffernan, K. Holley-Bockelmann, D. P. Mihaylov, M. C. Miller, and A. Sesana, “The unique potential of extreme mass-ratio inspirals for gravitational-wave astronomy,”Bull. Am. Astron. Soc., vol. 51, p. 42, 2019

    work page 2019

  34. [35]

    Testing General Relativity with Low-Frequency, Space-Based Gravitational-Wave Detectors,

    J. R. Gair, M. Vallisneri, S. L. Larson, and J. G. Baker, “Testing General Relativity with Low-Frequency, Space-Based Gravitational-Wave Detectors,” Living Rev. Rel., vol. 16, p. 7, 2013

    work page 2013

  35. [36]

    Detecting scalar fields with Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals,

    A. Maselli, N. Franchini, L. Gualtieri, and T. P. 54 Sotiriou, “Detecting scalar fields with Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 125, no. 14, p. 141101, 2020

    work page 2020

  36. [37]

    Detecting fundamental fields with LISA observations of gravitational waves from extreme mass-ratio inspirals,

    A. Maselli, N. Franchini, L. Gualtieri, T. P. Sotiriou, S. Barsanti, and P. Pani, “Detecting fundamental fields with LISA observations of gravitational waves from extreme mass-ratio inspirals,”Nature Astron., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 464–470, 2022

    work page 2022

  37. [38]

    Extreme mass-ratio inspirals as probes ofscalarfields: EccentricequatorialorbitsaroundKerr black holes,

    S. Barsanti, N. Franchini, L. Gualtieri, A. Maselli, and T. P. Sotiriou, “Extreme mass-ratio inspirals as probes ofscalarfields: EccentricequatorialorbitsaroundKerr black holes,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 106, no. 4, p. 044029, 2022

    work page 2022

  38. [39]

    Probing fundamental physics with Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals: a full Bayesian inference for scalar charge,

    L. Speri, S. Barsanti, A. Maselli, T. P. Sotiriou, N. Warburton, M. van de Meent, A. J. K. Chua, O. Burke, and J. Gair, “Probing fundamental physics with Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals: a full Bayesian inference for scalar charge,”ArXiv e-prints, 6 2024

    work page 2024

  39. [40]

    Tidalresonance in extreme mass-ratio inspirals,

    B.Bonga, H.Yang, andS.A.Hughes, “Tidalresonance in extreme mass-ratio inspirals,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 123, no. 10, p. 101103, 2019

    work page 2019

  40. [41]

    Relativis- tic Mean Motion Resonance,

    H. Yang, B. Bonga, Z. Peng, and G. Li, “Relativis- tic Mean Motion Resonance,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 100, no. 12, p. 124056, 2019

    work page 2019

  41. [42]

    Rel- ativistic model of binary extreme-mass-ratio inspiral systems and their gravitational radiation,

    Y. Yin, J. Mathews, A. J. K. Chua, and X. Chen, “Rel- ativistic model of binary extreme-mass-ratio inspiral systems and their gravitational radiation,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 10, p. 103007, 2025

    work page 2025

  42. [43]

    Environmental Effects in Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals: Perturbations to the Environment in Kerr Spacetimes,

    C. Dyson, T. F. M. Spieksma, R. Brito, M. van de Meent, and S. Dolan, “Environmental Effects in Extreme-Mass-Ratio Inspirals: Perturbations to the Environment in Kerr Spacetimes,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 134, no. 21, p. 211403, 2025

    work page 2025

  43. [44]

    Probing Accre- tion Physics with Gravitational Waves,

    L. Speri, A. Antonelli, L. Sberna, S. Babak, E. Ba- rausse, J. R. Gair, and M. L. Katz, “Probing Accre- tion Physics with Gravitational Waves,”Phys. Rev. X, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 021035, 2023

    work page 2023

  44. [45]

    LISA extreme- mass-ratio inspiral events as probes of the black hole mass function,

    J. R. Gair, C. Tang, and M. Volonteri, “LISA extreme- mass-ratio inspiral events as probes of the black hole mass function,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 81, p. 104014, 2010

    work page 2010

  45. [46]

    Rapid determination of LISA sensitivity to extreme mass ratio inspirals with machine learning,

    C. E. A. Chapman-Bird, C. P. L. Berry, and G. Woan, “Rapid determination of LISA sensitivity to extreme mass ratio inspirals with machine learning,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., vol. 522, no. 4, pp. 6043–6054, 2023

    work page 2023

  46. [47]

    Gravitational waves from Extreme Mass Ratio In- spirals in non-pure Kerr spacetimes,

    E. Barausse, L. Rezzolla, D. Petroff, and M. Ansorg, “Gravitational waves from Extreme Mass Ratio In- spirals in non-pure Kerr spacetimes,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 75, p. 064026, 2007

    work page 2007

  47. [48]

    The Influence of the hy- drodynamic drag from an accretion torus on extreme mass-ratio inspirals,

    E. Barausse and L. Rezzolla, “The Influence of the hy- drodynamic drag from an accretion torus on extreme mass-ratio inspirals,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 77, p. 104027, 2008

    work page 2008

  48. [49]

    Imprint of Accretion Disk-Induced Migration on Gravitational Waves from Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals,

    N. Yunes, B.Kocsis, A. Loeb, and Z.Haiman, “Imprint of Accretion Disk-Induced Migration on Gravitational Waves from Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 107, p. 171103, 2011

    work page 2011

  49. [50]

    Can environ- mental effects spoil precision gravitational-wave astro- physics?

    E. Barausse, V. Cardoso, and P. Pani, “Can environ- mental effects spoil precision gravitational-wave astro- physics?”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 89, no. 10, p. 104059, 2014

    work page 2014

  50. [51]

    Environmental Effects for Gravitational-wave Astrophysics,

    ——, “Environmental Effects for Gravitational-wave Astrophysics,”J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 610, no. 1, p. 012044, 2015

    work page 2015

  51. [52]

    Impact of relativistic wave- forms in LISA’s science objectives with extreme-mass- ratio inspirals,

    H. Khalvati, A. Santini, F. Duque, L. Speri, J. Gair, H. Yang, and R. Brito, “Impact of relativistic wave- forms in LISA’s science objectives with extreme-mass- ratio inspirals,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 8, p. 082010, 2025

    work page 2025

  52. [53]

    Constraining accretion physics with gravita- tional waves from eccentric extreme-mass-ratio inspi- rals,

    F. Duque, S. Kejriwal, L. Sberna, L. Speri, and J. Gair, “Constraining accretion physics with gravita- tional waves from eccentric extreme-mass-ratio inspi- rals,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 8, p. 084006, 2025

    work page 2025

  53. [54]

    Implications of stochastic gas torques for asymmetric binaries in the LISA band,

    L. Copparoni, E. Barausse, L. Speri, L. Sberna, and A. Derdzinski, “Implications of stochastic gas torques for asymmetric binaries in the LISA band,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 10, p. 104079, 2025

    work page 2025

  54. [55]

    Wet extreme mass ratio inspirals may be more common for spaceborne gravi- tational wave detection,

    Z. Pan, Z. Lyu, and H. Yang, “Wet extreme mass ratio inspirals may be more common for spaceborne gravi- tational wave detection,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 104, no. 6, p. 063007, 2021

    work page 2021

  55. [56]

    FormationRateofExtremeMass Ratio Inspirals in Active Galactic Nuclei,

    Z.PanandH.Yang, “FormationRateofExtremeMass Ratio Inspirals in Active Galactic Nuclei,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 103, no. 10, p. 103018, 2021

    work page 2021

  56. [57]

    Astrophysics with the Laser In- terferometer Space Antenna,

    P. A. Seoaneet al., “Astrophysics with the Laser In- terferometer Space Antenna,”Living Rev. Rel., vol. 26, no. 1, p. 2, 2023

    work page 2023

  57. [58]

    The Combined Effects of Two-body Relaxation Pro- cesses and the Eccentric Kozai–Lidov Mechanism on the Extreme-mass-ratio Inspirals Rate,

    S. Naoz, S. C. Rose, E. Michaely, D. Melchor, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, B. Mockler, and J. D. Schnittman, “The Combined Effects of Two-body Relaxation Pro- cesses and the Eccentric Kozai–Lidov Mechanism on the Extreme-mass-ratio Inspirals Rate,”Astrophys. J. Lett., vol. 927, no. 1, p. L18, 2022

    work page 2022

  58. [59]

    Precision of Hubble constant derived using black hole binary absolute dis- tances and statistical redshift information,

    C. L. MacLeod and C. J. Hogan, “Precision of Hubble constant derived using black hole binary absolute dis- tances and statistical redshift information,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 77, p. 043512, 2008

    work page 2008

  59. [60]

    Gravitational-wave cosmology with extreme mass- ratio inspirals,

    D. Laghi, N. Tamanini, W. Del Pozzo, A. Sesana, J. Gair, S. Babak, and D. Izquierdo-Villalba, “Gravitational-wave cosmology with extreme mass- ratio inspirals,”Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, vol. 508, no. 3, pp. 4512–4531, Dec. 2021

    work page 2021

  60. [61]

    Probing modified gravitational-wave propagation with extreme mass- ratio inspirals,

    C. Liu, D. Laghi, and N. Tamanini, “Probing modified gravitational-wave propagation with extreme mass- ratio inspirals,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 109, no. 6, p. 063521, 2024

    work page 2024

  61. [62]

    Cosmology with the Laser Interfer- ometerSpaceAntenna,

    P. Auclairet al., “Cosmology with the Laser Interfer- ometerSpaceAntenna,”Living Rev. Rel., vol.26, no.1, p. 5, 2023

    work page 2023

  62. [63]

    Strongly lensed ex- treme mass-ratio inspirals,

    M. Toscani, O. Burke, C. Liu, N. B. Zamel, N. Tamanini, and F. Pozzoli, “Strongly lensed ex- treme mass-ratio inspirals,”Physical Review D, vol. 109, no. 6, p. 063505, 2024

    work page 2024

  63. [64]

    Assessing the impact of instrumental calibration uncertainty on LISA science,

    E. Savalle, J. Gair, L. Speri, and S. Babak, “Assessing the impact of instrumental calibration uncertainty on LISA science,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 106, no. 2, p. 022003, 2022

    work page 2022

  64. [65]

    Black hole perturbation theory and gravitational self-force,

    A. Pound and B. Wardell, “Black hole perturbation theory and gravitational self-force,”Handbook of Grav- itational Wave Astronomy, pp. 1–119, 2022

    work page 2022

  65. [66]

    Self-force and radiation re- action in general relativity,

    L. Barack and A. Pound, “Self-force and radiation re- action in general relativity,”Rept. Prog. Phys., vol. 82, 55 no. 1, p. 016904, 2019

    work page 2019

  66. [67]

    Gravitational self force in extreme mass- ratioinspirals,

    L. Barack, “Gravitational self force in extreme mass- ratioinspirals,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol.26, p.213001, 2009

    work page 2009

  67. [68]

    EMRIs and the relativistic loss-cone: Thecuriouscaseofthefortunatecoincidence,

    T. Alexander, “EMRIs and the relativistic loss-cone: Thecuriouscaseofthefortunatecoincidence,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 840, no. 1, p. 012019, 2017

    work page 2017

  68. [69]

    Celestial mechanics in Kerr space-time,

    W. Schmidt, “Celestial mechanics in Kerr space-time,” Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 19, p. 2743, 2002

    work page 2002

  69. [70]

    Adiabatic waveforms for ex- treme mass-ratio inspirals via multivoice decomposi- tion in time and frequency,

    S. A. Hughes, N. Warburton, G. Khanna, A. J. K. Chua, and M. L. Katz, “Adiabatic waveforms for ex- treme mass-ratio inspirals via multivoice decomposi- tion in time and frequency,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 103, no. 10, p. 104014, 2021, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 107, 089901 (2023)]

    work page 2021

  70. [71]

    Gravitational wave snap- shots of generic extreme mass ratio inspirals,

    S. Drasco and S. A. Hughes, “Gravitational wave snap- shots of generic extreme mass ratio inspirals,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 73, no. 2, p. 024027, 2006, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 88, 109905 (2013), Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 90, 109905 (2014)]

    work page 2006

  71. [72]

    Exploring the Small Mass Ratio Binary Black Hole Merger via Zeno’s Di- chotomy Approach,

    C. O. Lousto and J. Healy, “Exploring the Small Mass Ratio Binary Black Hole Merger via Zeno’s Di- chotomy Approach,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 125, no. 19, p. 191102, 2020

    work page 2020

  72. [73]

    Adapted gauge tosmallmassratiobinaryblackholeevolutions,

    N. Rosato, J. Healy, and C. O. Lousto, “Adapted gauge tosmallmassratiobinaryblackholeevolutions,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 103, no. 10, p. 104068, 2021

    work page 2021

  73. [74]

    Study of the intermedi- ate mass ratio black hole binary merger up to 1000:1 withnumericalrelativity,

    C. O. Lousto and J. Healy, “Study of the intermedi- ate mass ratio black hole binary merger up to 1000:1 withnumericalrelativity,”Class. Quant. Grav., vol.40, no. 9, p. 09LT01, 2023

    work page 2023

  74. [75]

    Worldtube excision method for intermediate-mass- ratio inspirals: Self-consistent evolution in a scalar- charge model,

    N. A. Wittek, A. Pound, H. P. Pfeiffer, and L. Barack, “Worldtube excision method for intermediate-mass- ratio inspirals: Self-consistent evolution in a scalar- charge model,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 110, no. 8, p. 084023, 2024

    work page 2024

  75. [76]

    Relieving scale disparity in binary black hole simulations,

    N. A. Wittek, L. Barack, H. P. Pfeiffer, A. Pound, N. Deppe, L. E. Kidder, A. Macedo, K. C. Nelli, W. Throwe, and N. L. Vu, “Relieving scale disparity in binary black hole simulations,”ArXiv e-prints, 10 2024

    work page 2024

  76. [77]

    Efficient GPU-accelerated multisource global fit pipeline for LISA data analysis,

    M. L. Katz, N. Karnesis, N. Korsakova, J. R. Gair, and N. Stergioulas, “Efficient GPU-accelerated multisource global fit pipeline for LISA data analysis,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 2, p. 024060, 2025

    work page 2025

  77. [78]

    Modular global-fit pipelinefor LISA data analysis,

    S. Deng, S. Babak, M. Le Jeune, S. Marsat, E. Plagnol, and A. Sartirana, “Modular global-fit pipelinefor LISA data analysis,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 10, p. 103014, 2025

    work page 2025

  78. [79]

    Prototype global analysis of LISA data with multiple source types,

    T. B. Littenberg and N. J. Cornish, “Prototype global analysis of LISA data with multiple source types,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 107, no. 6, p. 063004, 2023

    work page 2023

  79. [80]

    Gravitational radiation reaction to a particle motion,

    Y. Mino, M. Sasaki, and T. Tanaka, “Gravitational radiation reaction to a particle motion,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 55, pp. 3457–3476, 1997

    work page 1997

  80. [81]

    An Axiomatic approach to electromagnetic and gravitational radiation reac- tion of particles in curved space-time,

    T. C. Quinn and R. M. Wald, “An Axiomatic approach to electromagnetic and gravitational radiation reac- tion of particles in curved space-time,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 56, pp. 3381–3394, 1997

    work page 1997

Showing first 80 references.