- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Post-Newtonian inspiral waveform model for eccentric precessing binaries with higher-order modes and matter effects

Gonzalo Morras1,2,*, Geraint Pratten3, Patricia Schmidt3, and Alessandra Buonanno1,4

  • *Contact author: gonzalo.morras@aei.mpg.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 044032 – Published 11 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/lxtg-6psv

Abstract

We introduce pyEFPEHM, a post-Newtonian (PN) inspiral waveform model for eccentric and spin-precessing compact binaries that includes higher-order modes and matter effects. Accurate and efficient waveform models capturing these effects are essential for probing compact-binary formation channels and exploiting current and future gravitational-wave (GW) observations. pyEFPEHM extends pyEFPE, significantly improving its physical content and accuracy. In particular, we show that above 2.5PN order the quasicircular contributions to the orbital phasing dominate at each PN order, and we incorporate all available higher-order quasicircular PN corrections to the phasing, including adiabatic tidal effects. We generalize the multiple-scale analysis solution of the spin-precession equations, extending it to higher PN orders and including all available quasicircular corrections. Finally, we add eccentric corrections up to 1PN order in the waveform amplitudes, including the GW multipoles (l,|m|)=(2,2),(2,1),(2,0),(3,3),(3,2),(3,1),(3,0),(4,4),(4,2),(4,0). We validate pyEFPEHM against existing analytical waveform models and numerical relativity simulations, showing that it provides a robust and computationally efficient description of the inspiral, with good agreement across a broad region of parameter space and up to close to merger. The accuracy degrades in the late inspiral for systems with very unequal masses (m2/m1≲0.1), significant spins aligned with the orbital angular momentum (|χeff|≳0.5), and high eccentricities (e≳0.6), where the PN expansion is expected to break down. pyEFPEHM represents a significant step toward physically complete and efficient waveform modeling of eccentric and precessing binaries, providing a foundation for future extensions including higher-order corrections, calibration to numerical relativity, and merger-ringdown modeling.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (183)

  1. 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. Relativity 16, 7 (2013).
  2. M. Evans et al., A horizon study for cosmic explorer: Science, observatories, and community, arXiv:2109.09882.
  3. P. A. Seoane et al. (LISA Collaboration), Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, Living Rev. Relativity 26, 2 (2023).
  4. I. Harry and J. Noller, Probing the speed of gravity with LVK, LISA, and joint observations, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 54, 133 (2022).
  5. N. Afshordi et al. (LISA Consortium Waveform Working Group), Waveform modelling for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, Living Rev. Relativity 28, 9 (2025).
  6. A. Abac et al. (ET Collaboration), The science of the Einstein Telescope, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2026) 081.
  7. J. Aasi et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration), Advanced LIGO, Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 074001 (2015).
  8. F. Acernese et al. (VIRGO Collaboration), Advanced Virgo: A second-generation interferometric gravitational wave detector, Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 024001 (2015).
  9. T. Akutsu et al. (KAGRA Collaboration), KAGRA: 2.5 Generation interferometric gravitational wave detector, Nat. Astron. 3, 35 (2019).
  10. B. P. Abbott et al. (KAGRA Collaboration, LIGO Scientific Collaboration, and Virgo Collaboration), Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA, Living Rev. Relativity 19, 1 (2016).
  11. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GWTC-1: A gravitational-wave transient catalog of compact binary mergers observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031040 (2019).
  12. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GWTC-2: Compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run, Phys. Rev. X 11, 021053 (2021).
  13. R. Abbott et al. (KAGRA Collaboration, VIRGO Collaboration, and LIGO Scientific Collaboration), GWTC-3: Compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the second part of the third observing run, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041039 (2023).
  14. A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration, VIRGO Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration), GWTC-4.0: Updating the gravitational-wave transient catalog with observations from the first part of the fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA observing run, Astrophys. J. Lett. 1004, L22 (2026).
  15. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GW190521: A binary black hole merger with a total mass of 150M⊙, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 101102 (2020).
  16. A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration, VIRGO Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration), GW231123: A binary black hole merger with total mass 190–265M⊙, Astrophys. J. Lett. 993, L25 (2025).
  17. A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration), GW241011 and GW241110: Exploring binary formation and fundamental physics with asymmetric, high-spin black hole coalescences, Astrophys. J. Lett. 993, L21 (2025).
  18. D. Gerosa and M. Fishbach, Hierarchical mergers of stellar-mass black holes and their gravitational-wave signatures, Nat. Astron. 5, 749 (2021).
  19. C. A. Álvarez, H. W. Y. Wong, A. Liu, and J. Calderón Bustillo, Kicking time back in black hole mergers: Ancestral masses, spins, birth recoils, and hierarchical-formation viability of GW190521, Astrophys. J. 977, 220 (2024).
  20. Y.-J. Li, Y.-Z. Wang, S.-P. Tang, and Y.-Z. Fan, Aligned hierarchical black hole mergers in AGN disks revealed by GWTC-4, arXiv:2509.23897.
  21. V. Gayathri, J. Healy, J. Lange, B. O’Brien, M. Szczepanczyk, I. Bartos, M. Campanelli, S. Klimenko, C. O. Lousto, and R. O’Shaughnessy, Eccentricity estimate for black hole mergers with numerical relativity simulations, Nat. Astron. 6, 344 (2022).
  22. R. Gamba, M. Breschi, G. Carullo, S. Albanesi, P. Rettegno, S. Bernuzzi, and A. Nagar, GW190521 as a dynamical capture of two nonspinning black holes, Nat. Astron. 7, 11 (2023).
  23. I. M. Romero-Shaw, P. D. Lasky, and E. Thrane, Four eccentric mergers increase the evidence that LIGO–Virgo–KAGRA’s binary black holes form dynamically, Astrophys. J. 940, 171 (2022).
  24. N. Gupte et al., Evidence for eccentricity in the population of binary black holes observed by LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA, Phys. Rev. D 112, 104045 (2025).
  25. M. d. L. Planas, A. Ramos-Buades, C. García-Quirós, H. Estellés, S. Husa, and M. Haney, Reanalysis of binary black hole gravitational wave events for orbital eccentricity signatures, Phys. Rev. D 112, 123004 (2025).
  26. I. Romero-Shaw, J. Stegmann, H. Tagawa, D. Gerosa, J. Samsing, N. Gupte, and S. R. Green, GW200208_222617 as an eccentric black-hole binary merger: Properties and astrophysical implications, Phys. Rev. D 112, 063052 (2025).
  27. G. Morras, G. Pratten, and P. Schmidt, Orbital eccentricity in a neutron star-black hole merger, Astrophys. J. Lett. 1000, L2 (2026).
  28. M. d. L. Planas, S. Husa, A. Ramos-Buades, and J. Valencia, First eccentric inspiral–merger–ringdown analysis of neutron star-black hole mergers, Astrophys. J. 995, 47 (2025).
  29. A. Jan, B.-J. Tsao, R. O’Shaughnessy, D. Shoemaker, and P. Laguna, GW200105: A detailed study of eccentricity in the neutron star-black hole binary, Phys. Rev. D 113, 024018 (2026).
  30. K. Kacanja, K. Soni, and A. H. Nitz, Eccentricity signatures in LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA’s binary neutron star and neutron-star black holes, Phys. Rev. D 112, 122007 (2025).
  31. A. Tiwari, S. A. Bhat, M. A. Shaikh, and S. J. Kapadia, Testing the nature of GW200105 by probing the frequency evolution of eccentricity, Astrophys. J. 995, 48 (2025).
  32. K. S. Phukon, P. Schmidt, G. Morras, and G. Pratten, Detection of GW200105 with a targeted eccentric search, Phys. Rev. D 113, 103023 (2026).
  33. A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration, VIRGO Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration), GWTC-4.0: Population properties of merging compact binaries, arXiv:2508.18083.
  34. J. Stegmann and J. Klencki, Orbital eccentricity and spin–orbit misalignment are evidence that neutron star-black hole mergers form through triple star evolution, Astrophys. J. Lett. 991, L54 (2025).
  35. I. Romero-Shaw, J. Stegmann, G. Morras, A. Dorozsmai, and M. Zevin, Astrophysical implications of eccentricity in gravitational waves from neutron star-black hole binaries, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 547, stag323 (2026).
  36. J. Stegmann, F. Antonini, A. Olejak, S. Biscoveanu, V. Raymond, S. Rinaldi, and B. Flanagan, In-plane black-hole spin measurements suggest most gravitational-wave mergers form in triples, Astrophys. J. Lett. 1000, L59 (2026).
  37. H. von Zeipel, Sur l’application des séries de M. Lindstedt à l’étude du mouvement des comètes périodiques, Astron. Nachr. 183, 345 (1910).
  38. M. L. Lidov, The evolution of orbits of artificial satellites of planets under the action of gravitational perturbations of external bodies, Planet. Space Sci. 9, 719 (1962).
  39. Y. Kozai, Secular perturbations of asteroids with high inclination and eccentricity, Astron. J. 67, 591 (1962).
  40. M. Maggiore et al. (ET Collaboration), Science case for the Einstein Telescope, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2020) 050.
  41. M. Branchesi et al., Science with the Einstein Telescope: A comparison of different designs, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2023) 068.
  42. D. Reitze et al., Cosmic explorer: The U.S. Contribution to gravitational-wave astronomy beyond LIGO, Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 035 (2019), https://inspirehep.net/literature/1743201.
  43. P. Amaro-Seoane et al. (LISA Collaboration), Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, arXiv:1702.00786.
  44. M. Colpi et al. (LISA Collaboration), LISA definition study report, arXiv:2402.07571.
  45. L. Pompili et al., Laying the foundation of the effective-one-body waveform models SEOBNRv5: Improved accuracy and efficiency for spinning nonprecessing binary black holes, Phys. Rev. D 108, 124035 (2023).
  46. 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 108, 124037 (2023).
  47. H. Estellés, M. Colleoni, C. García-Quirós, S. Husa, D. Keitel, M. Mateu-Lucena, M. d. L. Planas, and A. Ramos-Buades, New twists in compact binary waveform modeling: A fast time-domain model for precession, Phys. Rev. D 105, 084040 (2022).
  48. H. Estellés, A. Buonanno, R. Enficiaud, C. Foo, and L. Pompili, Adding equatorial-asymmetric effects for spin-precessing binaries into the SEOBNRv5PHM waveform model, Phys. Rev. D 113, 044049 (2026).
  49. E. Hamilton et al., PhenomXPNR: An improved gravitational wave model linking precessing inspirals and NR-calibrated merger-ringdown, Phys. Rev. D 113, 084055 (2026).
  50. J. Yoo et al., Numerical relativity surrogate model with memory effects and post-Newtonian hybridization, Phys. Rev. D 108, 064027 (2023).
  51. A. Gamboa et al., Accurate waveforms for eccentric, aligned-spin binary black holes: The multipolar effective-one-body model seobnrv5ehm, Phys. Rev. D 112, 044038 (2025).
  52. K. Paul, A. Maurya, Q. Henry, K. Sharma, P. Satheesh, Divyajyoti, P. Kumar, and C. K. Mishra, Eccentric, spinning, inspiral-merger-ringdown waveform model with higher modes for the detection and characterization of binary black holes, Phys. Rev. D 111, 084074 (2025).
  53. M. d. L. Planas, A. Ramos-Buades, C. García-Quirós, H. Estellés, S. Husa, and M. Haney, Time-domain phenomenological multipolar waveforms for aligned-spin binary black holes in elliptical orbits, Phys. Rev. D 113, 024006 (2026).
  54. P. J. Nee et al., Eccentric binary black holes: A new framework for numerical relativity waveform surrogates, Phys. Rev. Res. 8, 023362 (2026).
  55. A. Ramos-Buades, Q. Henry, and M. Haney, Fast frequency-domain phenomenological modeling of eccentric aligned-spin binary black holes, Phys. Rev. D 113, 083044 (2026).
  56. X. Liu, Z. Cao, and Z.-H. Zhu, Effective-one-body numerical-relativity waveform model for eccentric spin-precessing binary black hole coalescence, Classical Quantum Gravity 41, 195019 (2024).
  57. G. Morras, G. Pratten, and P. Schmidt, Improved post-Newtonian waveform model for inspiralling precessing-eccentric compact binaries, Phys. Rev. D 111, 084052 (2025).
  58. S. Albanesi, R. Gamba, S. Bernuzzi, J. Fontbuté, A. Gonzalez, and A. Nagar, Effective-one-body modeling for generic compact binaries with arbitrary orbits, Phys. Rev. D 112, L121503 (2025).
  59. L. DDPC, Description of the common dataset 1 light (mojito light) of the Lisa Ddpc (to be published).
  60. S. Roy and J. Janquart, Testing modified gravity with the eccentric neutron star-black hole merger GW200105, Phys. Rev. D 113, 024056 (2026).
  61. Z. Miao and H. Yang, Probing intrinsic ellipticity in neutron star binaries, arXiv:2511.08895.
  62. A. Klein, Y. Boetzel, A. Gopakumar, P. Jetzer, and L. de Vittori, Fourier domain gravitational waveforms for precessing eccentric binaries, Phys. Rev. D 98, 104043 (2018).
  63. A. Klein, EFPE: Efficient fully precessing eccentric gravitational waveforms for binaries with long inspirals, arXiv:2106.10291.
  64. J. N. Arredondo, A. Klein, and N. Yunes, Efficient gravitational-wave model for fully-precessing and moderately eccentric, compact binary inspirals, Phys. Rev. D 110, 044044 (2024).
  65. L. Blanchet, G. Faye, Q. Henry, F. Larrouturou, and D. Trestini, Gravitational-wave phasing of quasicircular compact binary systems to the fourth-and-a-half post-Newtonian order, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 121402 (2023).
  66. 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, L101501 (2022).
  67. M. Khalil, A. Buonanno, H. Estelles, D. P. Mihaylov, S. Ossokine, L. Pompili, and A. Ramos-Buades, Theoretical groundwork supporting the precessing-spin two-body dynamics of the effective-one-body waveform models SEOBNRv5, Phys. Rev. D 108, 124036 (2023).
  68. S. Marsat, Cubic order spin effects in the dynamics and gravitational wave energy flux of compact object binaries, Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 085008 (2015).
  69. E. Dones, Q. Henry, and L. Bernard, Tidal contributions to the full gravitational waveform to the second-and-a-half post-Newtonian order, Phys. Rev. D 111, 084043 (2025).
  70. T. Abdelsalhin, L. Gualtieri, and P. Pani, Post-Newtonian spin-tidal couplings for compact binaries, Phys. Rev. D 98, 104046 (2018).
  71. G. Morras, Modeling gravitational wave modes from the inspiral of binaries with arbitrary eccentricity, Phys. Rev. D 112, 084015 (2025).
  72. LIGO Scientific Collaboration, LIGO Algorithm Library—lalsuite, free software (GPL) (2018).
  73. A. Buonanno, B. Iyer, E. Ochsner, Y. Pan, and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Comparison of post-Newtonian templates for compact binary inspiral signals in gravitational-wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 80, 084043 (2009).
  74. R. Sturani, Note on the derivation of the angular momentum and spin precessing equations in SpinTaylor codes (2015).
  75. S. Isoyama, R. Sturani, and H. Nakano, Post-Newtonian templates for gravitational waves from compact binary inspirals, Handbook of Gravitational Wave Astronomy (Springer, Singapore, 2020).
  76. A. Gamboa, M. Khalil, and A. Buonanno, Third post-Newtonian dynamics for eccentric orbits and aligned spins in the effective-one-body waveform model seobnrv5ehm, Phys. Rev. D 112, 044037 (2025).
  77. A. Nagar, D. Chiaramello, R. Gamba, S. Albanesi, S. Bernuzzi, V. Fantini, M. Panzeri, and P. Rettegno, Effective-one-body waveform model for noncircularized, planar, coalescing black hole binaries. II. High accuracy by improving logarithmic terms in resummations, Phys. Rev. D 111, 064050 (2025).
  78. A. Nagar, R. Gamba, P. Rettegno, V. Fantini, and S. Bernuzzi, Effective-one-body waveform model for noncircularized, planar, coalescing black hole binaries: The importance of radiation reaction, Phys. Rev. D 110, 084001 (2024).
  79. L. Blanchet, Post-Newtonian theory for gravitational waves, Living Rev. Relativity 17, 2 (2014).
  80. K. S. Thorne, Multipole expansions of gravitational radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 52, 299 (1980).
  81. C. M. Bender and S. A. Orszag, Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers I: Asymptotic Methods and Perturbation Theory (Springer, New York, 1999).
  82. D. Gerosa, M. Kesden, U. Sperhake, E. Berti, and R. O’Shaughnessy, Multi-timescale analysis of phase transitions in precessing black-hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D 92, 064016 (2015).
  83. K. Chatziioannou, A. Klein, N. Yunes, and N. Cornish, Constructing gravitational waves from generic spin-precessing compact binary inspirals, Phys. Rev. D 95, 104004 (2017).
  84. L. E. Kidder, Using full information when computing modes of post-Newtonian waveforms from inspiralling compact binaries in circular orbit, Phys. Rev. D 77, 044016 (2008).
  85. P. Schmidt, M. Hannam, and S. Husa, Towards models of gravitational waveforms from generic binaries: A simple approximate mapping between precessing and non-precessing inspiral signals, Phys. Rev. D 86, 104063 (2012).
  86. P. Schmidt, M. Hannam, S. Husa, and P. Ajith, Tracking the precession of compact binaries from their gravitational-wave signal, Phys. Rev. D 84, 024046 (2011).
  87. M. Boyle, L. E. Kidder, S. Ossokine, and H. P. Pfeiffer, Gravitational-wave modes from precessing black-hole binaries, arXiv:1409.4431.
  88. A. Ramos-Buades, P. Schmidt, G. Pratten, and S. Husa, Validity of common modeling approximations for precessing binary black holes with higher-order modes, Phys. Rev. D 101, 103014 (2020).
  89. A. Klein, N. Cornish, and N. Yunes, Fast frequency-domain waveforms for spin-precessing binary inspirals, Phys. Rev. D 90, 124029 (2014).
  90. K. G. Arun, L. Blanchet, B. R. Iyer, and S. Sinha, Third post-Newtonian angular momentum flux and the secular evolution of orbital elements for inspiralling compact binaries in quasi-elliptical orbits, Phys. Rev. D 80, 124018 (2009).
  91. Q. Henry and M. Khalil, Spin effects in gravitational waveforms and fluxes for binaries on eccentric orbits to the third post-Newtonian order, Phys. Rev. D 108, 104016 (2023).
  92. Q. Henry and A. Heffernan, Adiabatic tides in compact binaries on quasi-elliptic orbits: Dynamics at the second-and-a-half relative post-Newtonian order, arXiv:2512.06489.
  93. Q. Henry, Adiabatic tides in compact binaries on quasi-elliptic orbits: Radiation at the second-and-a-half relative post-Newtonian order, arXiv:2601.01794.
  94. P. C. Peters and J. Mathews, Gravitational radiation from point masses in a Keplerian orbit, Phys. Rev. 131, 435 (1963).
  95. A. Klein and P. Jetzer, Spin effects in the phasing of gravitational waves from binaries on eccentric orbits, Phys. Rev. D 81, 124001 (2010).
  96. M. Cabero, A. B. Nielsen, A. P. Lundgren, and C. D. Capano, Minimum energy and the end of the inspiral in the post-Newtonian approximation, Phys. Rev. D 95, 064016 (2017).
  97. E. E. Flanagan and T. Hinderer, Constraining neutron star tidal Love numbers with gravitational wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 77, 021502 (2008).
  98. R. O’Shaughnessy, B. Vaishnav, J. Healy, Z. Meeks, and D. Shoemaker, Efficient asymptotic frame selection for binary black hole spacetimes using asymptotic radiation, Phys. Rev. D 84, 124002 (2011).
  99. M. Boyle, R. Owen, and H. P. Pfeiffer, A geometric approach to the precession of compact binaries, Phys. Rev. D 84, 124011 (2011).
  100. E. Poisson and M. Sasaki, Gravitational radiation from a particle in circular orbit around a black hole. 5: Black hole absorption and tail corrections, Phys. Rev. D 51, 5753 (1995).
  101. H. Tagoshi, S. Mano, and E. Takasugi, PostNewtonian expansion of gravitational waves from a particle in circular orbits around a rotating black hole: Effects of black hole absorption, Prog. Theor. Phys. 98, 829 (1997).
  102. K. Alvi, Energy and angular momentum flow into a black hole in a binary, Phys. Rev. D 64, 104020 (2001).
  103. K. Chatziioannou, E. Poisson, and N. Yunes, Tidal heating and torquing of a Kerr black hole to next-to-leading order in the tidal coupling, Phys. Rev. D 87, 044022 (2013).
  104. M. V. S. Saketh, J. Steinhoff, J. Vines, and A. Buonanno, Modeling horizon absorption in spinning binary black holes using effective worldline theory, Phys. Rev. D 107, 084006 (2023).
  105. B. M. Barker and R. F. O’Connell, Gravitational two-body problem with arbitrary masses, spins, and quadrupole moments, Phys. Rev. D 12, 329 (1975).
  106. E. Racine, Analysis of spin precession in binary black hole systems including quadrupole-monopole interaction, Phys. Rev. D 78, 044021 (2008).
  107. T. Colin, S. Tanay, and L. Bernard, Analytical solution of spinning, eccentric binary black hole dynamics at the second post-Newtonian order, arXiv:2603.20031.
  108. 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 compact binaries, Classical Quantum Gravity 30, 075017 (2013).
  109. S. Akcay, R. Gamba, and S. Bernuzzi, Hybrid post-Newtonian effective-one-body scheme for spin-precessing compact-binary waveforms up to merger, Phys. Rev. D 103, 024014 (2021).
  110. T. Damour, Coalescence of two spinning black holes: an effective one-body approach, Phys. Rev. D 64, 124013 (2001).
  111. P. Ajith et al., Inspiral-merger-ringdown waveforms for black-hole binaries with non-precessing spins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 241101 (2011).
  112. A. Buonanno, Y.-b. Chen, and M. Vallisneri, Detecting gravitational waves from precessing binaries of spinning compact objects: Adiabatic limit, Phys. Rev. D 67, 104025 (2003); 74, 029904(E) (2006), https://inspirehep.net/literature/603083.
  113. W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing, 3rd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2007).
  114. P. Virtanen et al., SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in python, Nat. Methods 17, 261 (2020).
  115. X. Zhao, M. Kesden, and D. Gerosa, Nutational resonances, transitional precession, and precession-averaged evolution in binary black-hole systems, Phys. Rev. D 96, 024007 (2017).
  116. B. S. Sathyaprakash and S. V. Dhurandhar, Choice of filters for the detection of gravitational waves from coalescing binaries, Phys. Rev. D 44, 3819 (1991).
  117. L. S. Finn and D. F. Chernoff, Observing binary inspiral in gravitational radiation: One interferometer, Phys. Rev. D 47, 2198 (1993).
  118. B. P. Abbott et al., Noise curves used for Simulations in the update of the Observing Scenarios Paper, Tech. Rep. LIGO-T2000012, LIGO Virgo KAGRA Collaboration, 2020.
  119. B. F. Schutz and M. Tinto, Antenna patterns of interferometric detectors of gravitational waves—I. Linearly polarized waves, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 224, 131 (1987).
  120. I. Harry, S. Privitera, A. Bohé, and A. Buonanno, Searching for gravitational waves from compact binaries with precessing spins, Phys. Rev. D 94, 024012 (2016).
  121. R. Storn and K. Price, Differential evolution—A simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces, J. Global Optim. 11, 341 (1997).
  122. E. Thrane and C. Talbot, An introduction to Bayesian inference in gravitational-wave astronomy: Parameter estimation, model selection, and hierarchical models, Pub. Astron. Soc. Aust. 36, e010 (2019); 37, e036 (2020).
  123. J. M. Bardeen, W. H. Press, and S. A. Teukolsky, Rotating black holes: Locally nonrotating frames, energy extraction, and scalar synchrotron radiation, Astrophys. J. 178, 347 (1972).
  124. G. Pratten, S. Husa, C. Garcia-Quiros, M. Colleoni, A. Ramos-Buades, H. Estelles, and R. Jaume, Setting the cornerstone for a family of models for gravitational waves from compact binaries: The dominant harmonic for nonprecessing quasicircular black holes, Phys. Rev. D 102, 064001 (2020).
  125. M. H. L. Pryce, The Mass center in the restricted theory of relativity and its connection with the quantum theory of elementary particles, Proc. R. Soc. A 195, 62 (1948).
  126. T. D. Newton and E. P. Wigner, Localized states for elementary systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 21, 400 (1949).
  127. W. Tulczyjew, Equations of motion of rotating bodies in general relativity theory, Acta Phys. Pol. 18, 37 (1959); 18, 534(E) (1959).
  128. W. G. Dixon, Dynamics of extended bodies in general relativity. I. Momentum and angular momentum, Proc. R. Soc. A 314, 499 (1970).
  129. A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 59, 084006 (1999).
  130. P. Schmidt, F. Ohme, and M. Hannam, Towards models of gravitational waveforms from generic binaries II: Modelling precession effects with a single effective precession parameter, Phys. Rev. D 91, 024043 (2015).
  131. D. Chiaramello and A. Nagar, Faithful analytical effective-one-body waveform model for spin-aligned, moderately eccentric, coalescing black hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D 101, 101501 (2020).
  132. S. Morisaki, Accelerating parameter estimation of gravitational waves from compact binary coalescence using adaptive frequency resolutions, Phys. Rev. D 104, 044062 (2021).
  133. B. Zackay, L. Dai, and T. Venumadhav, Relative binning and fast likelihood evaluation for gravitational wave parameter estimation, arXiv:1806.08792.
  134. N. J. Cornish, Heterodyned likelihood for rapid gravitational wave parameter inference, Phys. Rev. D 104, 104054 (2021).
  135. P. Canizares, S. E. Field, J. R. Gair, and M. Tiglio, Gravitational wave parameter estimation with compressed likelihood evaluations, Phys. Rev. D 87, 124005 (2013).
  136. R. Smith, S. E. Field, K. Blackburn, C.-J. Haster, M. Pürrer, V. Raymond, and P. Schmidt, Fast and accurate inference on gravitational waves from precessing compact binaries, Phys. Rev. D 94, 044031 (2016).
  137. N. J. Cornish, Time-frequency analysis of gravitational wave data, Phys. Rev. D 102, 124038 (2020).
  138. D. Bandopadhyay, C. E. A. Chapman-Bird, and A. Vecchio, Global time-frequency search for stellar-mass binary black holes in LISA, arXiv:2510.19047.
  139. M. A. Scheel et al., The SXS collaboration’s third catalog of binary black hole simulations, Classical Quantum Gravity 42, 195017 (2025).
  140. M. A. Shaikh, V. Varma, H. P. Pfeiffer, A. Ramos-Buades, and M. van de Meent, Defining eccentricity for gravitational wave astronomy, Phys. Rev. D 108, 104007 (2023).
  141. A. Bonino, P. Schmidt, and G. Pratten, Mapping eccentricity evolutions between numerical relativity and effective-one-body gravitational waveforms, Phys. Rev. D 110, 104002 (2024).
  142. D. Sun, M. Boyle, K. Mitman, M. A. Scheel, L. C. Stein, S. A. Teukolsky, and V. Varma, Optimizing post-Newtonian parameters and fixing the BMS frame for numerical-relativity waveform hybridizations, Phys. Rev. D 110, 104076 (2024).
  143. A. Ramos-Buades, M. van de Meent, H. P. Pfeiffer, H. R. Rüter, M. A. Scheel, M. Boyle, and L. E. Kidder, Eccentric binary black holes: Comparing numerical relativity and small mass-ratio perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 106, 124040 (2022).
  144. R. Gamba, D. Chiaramello, and S. Neogi, Toward efficient effective-one-body models for generic, nonplanar orbits, Phys. Rev. D 110, 024031 (2024).
  145. J. Veitch et al., Parameter estimation for compact binaries with ground-based gravitational-wave observations using the lalInference software library, Phys. Rev. D 91, 042003 (2015).
  146. L. Lindblom, B. J. Owen, and D. A. Brown, Model waveform accuracy standards for gravitational wave data analysis, Phys. Rev. D 78, 124020 (2008).
  147. J. E. Thompson, C. Hoy, E. Fauchon-Jones, and M. Hannam, Use and interpretation of signal-model indistinguishability measures for gravitational-wave astronomy, Phys. Rev. D 112, 064011 (2025).
  148. G. Ashton et al., BILBY: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser., 241, 27 (2019).
  149. R. J. E. Smith, G. Ashton, A. Vajpeyi, and C. Talbot, Massively parallel Bayesian inference for transient gravitational-wave astronomy, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 498, 4492 (2020).
  150. I. M. Romero-Shaw et al., Bayesian inference for compact binary coalescences with bilby: Validation and application to the first LIGO–Virgo gravitational-wave transient catalogue, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 499, 3295 (2020).
  151. J. S. Speagle, dynesty: A dynamic nested sampling package for estimating Bayesian posteriors and evidences, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 493, 3132 (2020).
  152. C. L. Rodriguez, B. Farr, V. Raymond, W. M. Farr, T. B. Littenberg, D. Fazi, and V. Kalogera, Basic parameter estimation of binary neutron star systems by the Advanced LIGO/Virgo network, Astrophys. J. 784, 119 (2014).
  153. P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 594, A13 (2016).
  154. F. Ohme, A. B. Nielsen, D. Keppel, and A. Lundgren, Statistical and systematic errors for gravitational-wave inspiral signals: A principal component analysis, Phys. Rev. D 88, 042002 (2013).
  155. M. Hannam, D. A. Brown, S. Fairhurst, C. L. Fryer, and I. W. Harry, When can gravitational-wave observations distinguish between black holes and neutron stars?, Astrophys. J. Lett. 766, L14 (2013).
  156. S. A. Usman, J. C. Mills, and S. Fairhurst, Constraining the inclinations of binary mergers from gravitational-wave observations, Astrophys. J. 877, 82 (2019).
  157. C. Mills and S. Fairhurst, Measuring gravitational-wave higher-order multipoles, Phys. Rev. D 103, 024042 (2021).
  158. M. Favata, C. Kim, K. G. Arun, J. Kim, and H. W. Lee, Constraining the orbital eccentricity of inspiralling compact binary systems with Advanced LIGO, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023003 (2022).
  159. L. Wen, On the eccentricity distribution of coalescing black hole binaries driven by the Kozai mechanism in globular clusters, Astrophys. J. 598, 419 (2003).
  160. J. Samsing, M. MacLeod, and E. Ramirez-Ruiz, The formation of eccentric compact binary inspirals and the role of gravitational wave emission in binary-single stellar encounters, Astrophys. J. 784, 71 (2014).
  161. C. L. Rodriguez, P. Amaro-Seoane, S. Chatterjee, K. Kremer, F. A. Rasio, J. Samsing, C. S. Ye, and M. Zevin, Post-Newtonian dynamics in dense star clusters: Formation, masses, and merger rates of highly-eccentric black hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D 98, 123005 (2018).
  162. M. Zevin, J. Samsing, C. Rodriguez, C.-J. Haster, and E. Ramirez-Ruiz, Eccentric black hole mergers in dense star clusters: The role of binary–binary encounters, Astrophys. J. 871, 91 (2019).
  163. H. Tagawa, Z. Haiman, and B. Kocsis, Formation and evolution of compact object binaries in AGN disks, Astrophys. J. 898, 25 (2020).
  164. M. A. Sedda, Dissecting the properties of neutron star—black hole mergers originating in dense star clusters, Commun. Phys. 3, 43 (2020).
  165. F. Antonini, C. L. Rodriguez, C. Petrovich, and C. L. Fischer, Precessional dynamics of black hole triples: Binary mergers with near-zero effective spin, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 480, L58 (2018).
  166. A. A. Trani, S. Rastello, U. N. Di Carlo, F. Santoliquido, A. Tanikawa, and M. Mapelli, Compact object mergers in hierarchical triples from low-mass young star clusters, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 511, 1362 (2022).
  167. F. Antonini, S. Toonen, and A. S. Hamers, Binary black hole mergers from field triples: Properties, rates and the impact of stellar evolution, Astrophys. J. 841, 77 (2017).
  168. F. Antonini and H. B. Perets, Secular evolution of compact binaries near massive black holes: Gravitational wave sources and other exotica, Astrophys. J. 757, 27 (2012).
  169. A. P. Stephan, S. Naoz, A. M. Ghez, G. Witzel, B. N. Sitarski, T. Do, and B. Kocsis, Merging binaries in the Galactic Center: The eccentric Kozai–Lidov mechanism with stellar evolution, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 460, 3494 (2016).
  170. C. K. Mishra, K. G. Arun, and B. R. Iyer, Third post-Newtonian gravitational waveforms for compact binary systems in general orbits: Instantaneous terms, Phys. Rev. D 91, 084040 (2015).
  171. Y. Boetzel, C. K. Mishra, G. Faye, A. Gopakumar, and B. R. Iyer, Gravitational-wave amplitudes for compact binaries in eccentric orbits at the third post-Newtonian order: Tail contributions and postadiabatic corrections, Phys. Rev. D 100, 044018 (2019).
  172. M. Khalil, A. Buonanno, J. Steinhoff, and J. Vines, Radiation-reaction force and multipolar waveforms for eccentric, spin-aligned binaries in the effective-one-body formalism, Phys. Rev. D 104, 024046 (2021).
  173. D. Christodoulou, Nonlinear nature of gravitation and gravitational wave experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 1486 (1991).
  174. L. Blanchet and T. Damour, Hereditary effects in gravitational radiation, Phys. Rev. D 46, 4304 (1992).
  175. M. Favata, The gravitational-wave memory from eccentric binaries, Phys. Rev. D 84, 124013 (2011).
  176. S. Ghosh, P. Kolitsidou, and M. Hannam, First frequency-domain phenomenological model of the multipole asymmetry in gravitational-wave signals from binary-black-hole coalescence, Phys. Rev. D 109, 024061 (2024).
  177. L. Honet, J. Mathews, G. Compère, A. Pound, B. Wardell, G. A. Piovano, M. van de Meent, and N. Warburton, Spin-aligned inspiral waveforms from self-force and post-Newtonian theory, arXiv:2510.16112.
  178. J. Mathews, B. Wardell, A. Pound, and N. Warburton, Post-adiabatic self-force waveforms: Slowly spinning primary and precessing secondary, Phys. Rev. D 113, 064034 (2026).
  179. V. Varma, S. E. Field, M. A. Scheel, J. Blackman, D. Gerosa, L. C. Stein, L. E. Kidder, and H. P. Pfeiffer, Surrogate models for precessing binary black hole simulations with unequal masses, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033015 (2019).
  180. G. Morras, G. Pratten, P. Schmidt, and A. Buonanno, pyEFPEHM code repository (2026), https://github.com/gw-models/pyEFPEHM.
  181. Y. Choquet-Bruhat, General Relativity and the Einstein Equations, Oxford Mathematical Monographs (Oxford University Press, New York, 2009).
  182. G. Castro, L. Gualtieri, A. Maselli, and P. Pani, Impact and detectability of spin-tidal couplings in neutron star inspirals, Phys. Rev. D 106, 024011 (2022).
  183. T. Hinderer, Tidal Love numbers of neutron stars, Astrophys. J. 677, 1216 (2008); 697, 964(E) (2009).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 044032– Published 11 August, 2026
  • Received 15 April 2026
  • Accepted 29 June 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Open access publication funded by the Max Planck Society.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation