# Unveiling the gravitational universe at µ-Hz frequencies

Alberto Sesana, Natalia Korsakova, Manuel Arca Sedda, Vishal Baibhav, Enrico Barausse, Simon Barke, Emanuele Berti, Matteo Bonetti, Pedro R Capelo, Chiara Caprini, et al.

► To cite this version:

Alberto Sesana, Natalia Korsakova, Manuel Arca Sedda, Vishal Baibhav, Enrico Barausse, et al. Unveiling the gravitational universe at µ-Hz frequencies. Experimental Astronomy, 2021, 10.1007/s10686-021-09709-9. insu-03336222

HAL Id: insu-03336222

https://insu.hal.science/insu-03336222

Submitted on 7 Sep 2021

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Check for
updates

# Unveiling the gravitational universe at μ-Hz frequencies

Alberto Sesana¹ Ⓓ · Natalia Korsakova² Ⓓ · Manuel Arca Sedda³ ·

Vishal Baibhav⁴ · Enrico Barausse⁵ · Simon Barke⁶ · Emanuele Berti⁴ ·

Matteo Bonetti¹ · Pedro R. Capelo⁷ · Chiara Caprini⁸ · Juan Garcia-Bellido⁹ ·

Zoltan Haiman¹⁰ · Karan Jani¹¹ · Oliver Jennrich¹² · Peter H. Johansson¹³ ·

Fazeel Mahmood Khan¹⁴ · Valeriya Korol¹⁵ · Astrid Lamberts² ·

Alessandro Lupi¹,¹⁶ · Alberto Mangiagli¹ · Lucio Mayer⁷ ·

Germano Nardini¹⁷ · Fabio Pacucci¹⁸ · Antoine Petiteau⁸ · Alvise Raccanelli¹⁹ ·

Surjeet Rajendran³ · John Regan²⁰ · Lijing Shao²¹ · Alessandro Spallicci²² ·

Nicola Tamanini²³ · Marta Volonteri²⁴ · Niels Warburton²⁵ · Kaze Wong⁴ ·

Miguel Zumalacarregui²⁶

Received: 12 September 2020 / Accepted: 9 February 2021 / Published online: 04 September 2021
© The Author(s) 2021

## Abstract

We propose a space-based interferometer surveying the gravitational wave (GW) sky in the milli-Hz to μ-Hz frequency range. By the 2040s, the μ-Hz frequency band, bracketed in between the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) and pulsar timing arrays, will constitute the largest gap in the coverage of the astrophysically relevant GW spectrum. Yet many outstanding questions related to astrophysics and cosmology are best answered by GW observations in this band. We show that a μ-Hz GW detector will be a truly overarching observatory for the scientific community at large, greatly extending the potential of LISA. Conceived to detect massive black hole binaries from their early inspiral with high signal-to-noise ratio, and low-frequency stellar binaries in the Galaxy, this instrument will be a cornerstone for multimessenger astronomy from the solar neighbourhood to the high-redshift Universe.

**Keywords** Space gravitational wave detector · Micro-Hz band · Massive black hole binaries · Multimessenger and multiband Astronomy · General relativity and beyond · Cosmology and cosmography · Milky Way science

<footnote>✉ Alberto Sesana
alberto.sesana@unimib.it</footnote>
# 1 Introduction: the GW landscape post-LISA

As we enter the era of gravitational wave (GW) astrophysics, the Universe unfolds by revealing the most extreme and energetic events abiding by the laws of gravity. In the first and second observing runs, the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) and Virgo detected cosmic whispers from several colliding black hole binaries (BHBs, [5, 6]) and from a neutron star (NS) binary (NSB, [3]), this latter accompanied by spectacular electromagnetic (EM) emission visible at all wavelengths [4]. We now know that BHBs form in great numbers and routinely merge along the cosmic history, and that their dynamics in the strong field is consistent (within measurement errors) with general relativity (GR) [7]. We know that colliding NSs are the engines of short gamma-ray bursts, they give rise to radioactive decay powered kilonovae, and they pollute the interstellar medium with heavy elements (e.g. [241, 258]). In short, GWs broke onto the stage, bringing the promise of revolutionizing our understanding of astrophysics, cosmology and fundamental physics [46].

This revolution will be completed in the next two decades, when observatories on the ground and in space will survey the GW Universe across the frequency spectrum, from the kilo-Hz down to the nano-Hz. In the 0.3–10⁴ Hz window, third-generation (3G) ground-based detectors, such as the Einstein Telescope (ET, [206]) and Cosmic Explorer (CE, [214]), will detect millions of stellar-origin compact object (CO) binaries (BHBs, NSBs, and NS-BH binaries) out to $z > 10$. At $10^{-4} < f < 0.1$ Hz, the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA, [15]) will: observe the coalescence of massive black hole (MBH) binaries (MBHBs) in the mass range $3 \times 10^3 < M < 10^7 M_{\odot}$ everywhere in the Universe; probe the population of double white dwarfs (DWDs) in the Galaxy; capture COs slowly inspiralling onto MBHs, mapping out their geometric structure; and pierce through the cosmic microwave background (CMB) to probe the physics of the early Universe [14, 23, 34, 68, 155, 160, 252]. At even lower frequencies, pulsar timing arrays (PTAs, [271]) and the square kilometre array (SKA, [92]) will probe the $10^{-9} < f < 10^{-7}$ Hz window, unveiling the adiabatic inspiral of the most massive BHs in the Universe, inhabiting the cores of the most massive galaxies at $z < 1$ [144, 209]. The panorama will be completed by advanced polarization experiments such as the Probe of Inflation and Cosmic Origins (PICO, [131]) and the Cosmic Origins Explorer (COrE, [261]), attempting to probe the B-mode polarization imprinted by a relic stochastic GW background (SGWB) of cosmological origin onto the CMB.

In parallel, new advanced facilities capturing EM radiation in all bands will be operational on the ground and in space. Thirty-meter class optical telescopes, such as the Extremely Large Telescope (ELT, [121]) and Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT, [223]), will reveal the assembly of the first galaxies out to $z > 10$; the next generation of X-ray missions, like the ESA L2 Advanced Telescope for High Energy Astrophysics (Athena, [189]) and the proposed NASA Lynx [115], will probe the emergence of the first quasars; the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST, [114]) and the Roman Space Telescope (previously known as WFIRST, [246]) will pierce through the first billion years of galaxy formation, and will potentially unveil the nature of dark energy; the SKA itself will probe the ionization history of the Universe
with 21cm tomography. Light and gravity will work together to unveil the intimate
nature of ultradense dark matter (DM) in NSB mergers, multimessenger observations
of NSBs will offer a new way to measure the geometry of the Universe, perhaps
we will catch EM signals from merging MBHBs out to moderate redshifts, gaining
new insights into the galaxy and MBH assembly processes as well as the interplay
between dynamic gravity and relativistic plasma.

Yet, the foreseeable achievements of the coming two decades of exploration of
the Cosmos will inevitably leave unanswered questions and bring new challenges.
In the context of the Voyage 2050 program,<fnref n="1" /> we explore in this White Paper, the
possibility of a µ-Hz space-based GW mission, bridging the gap between the milli-
Hz and nano-Hz frequency windows surveyed by LISA and PTAs, respectively. By
the 2040s, this will likely be the largest gap in the coverage of the astrophysically
relevant GW spectrum, and open questions related to a variety of topics, ranging from
the emergence of the $z > 7$ quasars to the physics of over-contact binaries, may well
find their answer in there. In Section 2, we sketch the sensitivity of a possible detector
extending the range of space-based interferometry to ≈ $10^{-7}$ Hz and highlight its
most relevant observational capabilities. We refer to those to construct a detailed
science case in Section 3 and present a more detailed strawman mission concept in
Section 4.

## 2 The observational potential of a µ-Hz space-based detector

To support the case for a μ-Hz detector, we anchor our discussion to a specific helio-
centric constellation of satellites, that will be described in more detail in Section 4.
The main idea is to place three spacecraft in a nearly Martian orbit, forming an
equilateral triangle, thus allowing the construction of two independent Michelson
interferometers operating via time delay interferometry (TDI, [263]), analogue to
LISA. Ideally, the instrument will feature a second identical constellation, at an
angle with respect to the ecliptic. The rotation of the two constellations in different
planes with a 1.8 year period, will allow sky localization via Doppler modulation
at a LISA level, if not better. From now on, we will refer to this detector as μAres.
The observational potential of μAres described below is based on a 10 year mission
duration.

Figure 1 shows the μAres sensitivity, together with a detailed overview of expected and potential sources. With nearly 400M km armlength, μAres can achieve a characteristic strain sensitivity of $h_c \approx 10^{-18}$ at $f = 10^{-6}$ Hz, with more than two orders of magnitude frequency gain compared to LISA. Note that, due to the enhanced laser power (see Section 4), its sensitivity is only ≈ 3 times worse than LISA at $f > 0.01$ Hz, and ≈ 3 times better around 0.003 Hz, being limited by Galactic DWDs at lower frequencies. Although the milli-Hz range is not the specific focus of this proposal, we note that μAres might in fact outperform LISA ‘in the bucket’,

<footnote n="1">¹https://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/voyage-2050</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

**Fig. 1** µAres sky-averaged sensitivity curve (thick black curve; dashed: instrument only; solid: including astrophysical foregrounds), compared to LISA (thin solid black curve) and SKA (solid black line at the top left). Sources in the SKA portion of the figure include individual signals from a population of MBHBs (pale violet), resulting in an unresolved GWB (jagged blue line) on top of which the loudest sources can be individually resolved (dark blue triangles). The vast diversity of µAres sources is described by the labels in the figure. For all Galactic sources (including DWDs, BHBs, and objects orbiting SgrA*), the frequency drift during the observing time has been assumed to be negligible. We thus plot $h\sqrt{n}$, where *n* is the number of cycles completed over the mission lifetime, assumed to be 10 years. In this case, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the source is given by the height of its marker over the sensitivity curve. Extragalactic sources (including BHBs, MBHBs, EMRIs, and IMRIs) generally drift in frequency over the observation time. We thus plot the standard $h_c = h(f^2/f_c)$. In this case, the SNR of the source is given by the area enclosed in between the source track and the sensitivity curve. In both cases, when multiple harmonics are present, SNR summation in quadrature applies

offering as a potential bonus a deeper view onto extreme mass ratio inspirals (EMRIs) and stellar-origin BHBs.

We now enumerate the observational potential of this design, separating sources in Galactic, and extragalactic, proceeding in order of increasing ‘cosmological distance’ to the observer. When population models for specific sources are available, we list expected detection numbers, whereas for more speculative sources we highlight the reach of the detector.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>
## The Milky Way as a GW factory

- $\mathcal{O}(10^5)$ resolved Galactic DWDs, down to $f \approx 10^{-4}$ Hz (model from [169]);

- $\mathcal{O}(100)$ resolved Galactic BHBs, down to $f \approx 10^{-5}$ Hz (model from [168]);

- thousands of mixed (CO + main sequence star), contact, and over-contact binaries, mostly in the unexplored $10^{-5}-10^{-4}$ Hz frequency range;

- COs with masses down to $\approx 10^{-3}$ M$_\odot$ orbiting SgrA* out to distances of several AU, including up to $\mathcal{O}(100)$ stellar BHs and many more brown dwarfs.

## Astrophysical sources, from the local Universe to the dawn of galaxy formation

- $\mathcal{O}(10^3)$ extragalactic BHBs, improving by an order of magnitude over LISA;

- EMRIs around MBHs in the mass range $10^5-10^6$ M$_\odot$ out to $z > 3$;

- intermediate mass ratio inspirals (IMRIs) involving $10^3-10^4$ M$_\odot$ intermediate mass black holes (IMBHs) inspiralling onto $10^7-10^8$ M$_\odot$ MBHs out to $z \gtrsim 6$;

- $\approx 50$ inspiralling MBHBs with $M_1 < 10^6$M$_\odot$ in dwarf galaxies at $z < 0.5$ (model from [49]);

- $\mathcal{O}(100)$ merging MBHBs along the cosmic history with high SNR (model from [49]);

- $\mathcal{O}(10^3)$ inspiralling MBHBs at $z < 10$, some of them caught thousands of years from coalescence (model from [49]);

- bursts from $M > 10^6$ M$_\odot$ direct seed formation out to high redshift.

## Stochastic signals; astrophysical foregrounds and cosmological backgrounds

- characterization of the DWDs confusion noise over two decades of frequencies, with SNR> 1000 and detection of confusion noise from contact binaries with periods ranging from few days to few hours in the $10^{-5}-10^{-4}$ Hz frequency range;

- unresolved foreground arising from unresolved MBHBs at $10^{-7} < f < 10^{-5}$ Hz;

- unresolved foregrounds arising from extragalactic BNSs and BHBs (similar to LISA);

- cosmological SGWBs down to $h^2\Omega_{gw} \sim 6 \times 10^{-17}$ at $2 \times 10^{-4}$ Hz (nearly four orders of magnitude more sensitive than LISA).

**Early source localization** Besides detection at high SNR, extending the sensitivity to low frequencies crucially implies that merging MBHBs will be detected early in their inspiral and localized in the sky well before merger. Assuming two triangular non-coplanar constellations, µAres will localize merging SMBHs at $z < 5$ to better than $10 \text{ deg}^2$ a year before final coalescence (see Fig. 4 and discussion in Section 3.2), opening avenues in multimessenger astronomy which will still be impracticable with LISA.
# 3 Science goals

With a general overview of the detector sensitivity and of the observable sources, we now describe the core science enabled by a µAres-like detector. We define five main themes:

1. the MBH Universe;

2. multimessenger and multiband view;

3. general relativity and beyond;

4. cosmology and cosmography;

5. the Milky Way.

The following subsections describe in detail individual specific themes, with the main science goals summarized in the boxes at the end of each subsection.

## 3.1 The massive black hole Universe

### 3.1.1 The emergence of high redshift quasars

Quasars (QSOs) are among the brightest sources of EM radiation in the Universe and they are currently observed as far back as $z = 7.5$ ([22], see also [102, 187, 282]). These sources are powered by supermassive black holes (SMBHs)<fnref n="2" /> on typical mass scales of $10^9-10^{10} M_{\odot}$, characterized by luminosities up to $10^{47}-10^{48} \text{ erg s}^{-1}$, and are currently observed at cosmic epochs up to about 800 Myr after the Big Bang, while theoretical models (e.g. [31]) and observations (e.g. [51]) suggest that the first stars and black holes started forming 100–200 Myr after the Big Bang. It is thus very remarkable that the mass assembly of the first MBHs occurred very rapidly, in less than ~ 600 Myr. Although the direct detection of the first stars and black holes is not yet feasible, it is a primary goal for any future surveys. In fact, observing these primordial objects is a crucial step towards constraining the properties of the very early Universe (see, e.g. [130, 196]).

The MBHs powering these quasars should have grown from initial “seeds”, formed at $z = 10–30$, and their assembly histories over cosmic time is the end result of many different mechanisms, often acting at the same time: seeding, accretion, and mergers (see Section 3.1.2). Hence, the accelerated assembly process needed for the high-redshift QSOs must rely on enhancing either the initial seed mass, the growth rate, or the merger rate. In either case, non-conventional physical mechanisms are required: either an accelerated growth of BHs, well above the Eddington limit (e.g. [38, 140, 175, 195, 275]), the emergence and eventual collapse of a supermassive star, formed as a result of unusually rapid accretion [127, 137, 211], an extremely massive black hole seed formed by relativistic “dark collapse” of a supermassive cloud by-passing the supermassive star stage [183], a major contribution from MBHB mergers

<footnote n="2">²Massive and supermassive black holes (MBHs and SMBHs) are interchangeably used in the literature to refer to black holes with $M > 10^6 M_{\odot}$. Here we use SMBH only when referring to the $M > 10^9 M_{\odot}$ systems powering quasars. We instead use MBH and MBHB when referring to those systems as GW sources for µAres.</footnote>
despite ejections caused by anisotropic emission of GWs [128], or formation channels with much more massive seeds related to topological defects or large-curvature perturbations in the early Universe [54, 69] (see also Section 3.2.1).

More generally, the complementarity of accretion and mergers extends beyond the exceptional, but rare, high-redshift quasars. All MBHs in the Universe are expected to experience both, and to grow through these processes. The crucial question is: what is the most relevant process as a function of cosmic time and environment? The contribution of accretion can be traced by EM observations, converting the emitted energy into the mass that created such energy: this is Soltan's argument [243]. GW observations detect mergers of black holes and thus measure their contribution. Only the powerful combination of these two probes can provide a complete census of how MBHs obtained their mass. Theoretical models suggest that the growth by MBHB mergers becomes more important at low redshifts and for masses higher than $10^8 M_\odot$, as cold gas dwindles in the most massive galaxies [97, 165, 179].

It is fundamental to extend the observing capabilities in GWs to cover the mass and redshift range between LISA and PTA: this range corresponds to the peak of the quasar epoch and probes the golden age of MBH growth. In fact, disentangling different growth mechanisms is a very difficult task, as their imprint is blurred as time elapses. By extending the observation window down to the µ-Hz range, not only µAres will detect mergers of MBHBs at high SNR at $z \sim 7-15$, but it will also provide a large statistical sample of $\mathcal{O}(10^3)$ inspiralling MBHBs out to $z \approx 10$ (see Fig. 2). This will allow us to infer the mass distribution of MBHs, as a function of redshift, when the signature of the different scenarios is dominant. For instance,

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2** Example distributions of MBHBs detected with SNR > 8 by µAres, assuming 10 years of observations. The sample comes from model HS-delayed of [49]. A total of ≈ $10^3$ sources are detected (blue histograms); of those, ≈ 250 merge in the detector band within the mission lifetime (red histograms) and ≈ 750 are observed during the adiabatic inspiral over the whole mission duration (green histograms)</figcaption></figure>
super-Eddington accretion onto light seeds, as opposed to Eddington-limited accre-
tion on seeds that start 3–4 orders of magnitude larger in mass, could reveal itself
through a different evolution of the high end of the mass distribution at such early
epochs. Conversely, many of these scenarios, since they are designed to grow MBHs
very quickly above $10^6-10^7$ M$_{\odot}$, would not be probed, and thus will not be disentan-
gled, at the higher detection frequencies at which LISA will work. Hence, the power
of a low-frequency GW detector is in its ability to probe the demographics of MBHs
across masses and redshifts all the way up to the masses of high-redshift QSOs.

Host galaxy identification can provide even deeper insights into the emergence of QSOs and MBHs. In fact, the hosts of the $10^6-10^7$ M$_{\odot}$ MBHs are very dissimilar in different seeding models – in particular, in “stellar-seed” models, the hosts at this BH mass stage are typically well-developed $10^{11}-10^{12}$ M$_{\odot}$ galaxies [126], whereas in the “direct collapse” models, the heavy seeds form in $10^7-10^8$ M$_{\odot}$ DM halos, which, after an order of magnitude growth in BH mass, still typically remain < $10^9$ M$_{\odot}$ sized dwarf galaxies [273]. Although LISA might provide enough information to identify the counterparts of relatively massive binaries at $z \lesssim 3$, *the superior low-frequency performance of µAres will greatly enhance EM-GW synergies*, as we further describe in Section 3.2.

3.1.2 Testing massive black hole formation scenarios

MBHs have grown from initial “seeds”, formed at $z = 10–30$, usually categorized
as light (up to $10^2$ M$_{\odot}$ and formed as stellar remnants [178]) and heavy (up to $10^4–$
$10^6$ M$_{\odot}$, formed via the collapse of a supermassive star or the runaway collapse of
a dense star cluster – see, e.g. [281] for a review) seeds. Other, more exotic pos-
sibilities for the initial seeds range from primordial black holes (PBHs) (e.g. [37])
to DM-powered massive stars [109]. The subsequent mass assembly is likely the
result of a complex interplay between accretion and mergers, as mentioned above.
Although LISA (in combination with 3G detectors) will be already well placed to dis-
entangle several ‘standard’ seeding models (e.g. the ‘Pop III stars vs direct collapse’
dichotomy, see [235]), µAres will provide further insights onto alternative scenarios,
involving particularly high-mass/high-redshift seeds that might be especially relevant
to the formation of high-redshift QSOs.

**Bursts via direct collapse** One of the ways by which MBH seeds might form is via direct gas collapse. There are various pathways to BH formation in direct collapse [281], the common aspect being that (1) no conventional star (Pop III) forms and (2) the resulting black hole seed is massive (> $10^3–10^4$ M$_{\odot}$, with the upper limit highly dependent on the specific scenario). Some of the models involve the formation of supermassive protostars/stars ($M > 10^5$ M$_{\odot}$) which later collapse into a BH once hydrostatic equilibrium cannot be maintained any longer or once the pulsational relativistic radial instability sets in [127, 138]. Early analytical work by [108], for example, showed that the progenitor mass must be > $10^6$ M$_{\odot}$ in the presence of rotation, which has been confirmed by further theoretical considerations [281]. In an even more ‘extreme’ scenario, a > $10^6$ M$_{\odot}$ MBH seed can directly form by relativistic collapse of a supermassive cloud formed following a gas-rich galaxy merger [183].
While for stellar progenitors up to $10^6 M_\odot$ the signal should be within the detection capabilities of LISA, for larger masses of the progenitors the signal shifts to frequencies below $10^{-3}$ Hz, and the strain drops below $10^{-19}$ if the source is at $z > 6$ [222]. Given that one needs to be able to detect such signals at very high redshift, when BH seeds should form, it follows that higher sensitivity at and below the lowest frequencies accessible to LISA will be needed. In particular, the emergence of supermassive stars, which undergo direct collapse to form MBHs, requires special conditions of rapid mass inflow in pristine, very metal-poor gas. This phase likely occurred very early on (with the typical such event at $z = 15–20$) and will make a detection by LISA quite challenging.

An even richer sequence of signals might arise if, as suggested by some numerical relativity work [213], the progenitor undergoes a non-axisymmetric global instability (e.g. a bar instability) just before the radial instability becomes the dominant mode. In this case, like in standard protostellar collapse, fragmentation into two or more supermassive stars would arise, which would produce a collapse signal (burst + ringing) followed by a short duration inspiral + merger signal, as at least one binary might form at such small separation such that the merger will be prompt. Again, since this will be more likely for high progenitor masses, low-frequency sensitivity should be beneficial also for the detection of the inspiral + merger signal.

**Build-up from primordial black holes through EMRs/IMRs** The same inflationary mechanism that generates large-scale fluctuations in the CMB and the large-scale structure of the Universe (galaxies and clusters) also generates fluctuations on small scales. Some inflationary dynamics predict that thirty e-folds before the end of inflation large curvature fluctuations were generated, which then collapsed upon horizon re-entry to form black holes during the radiation era [113]. These PBHs are made out of photons which cannot escape the gravitational collapse of large-curvature perturbations generated from quantum fluctuations during inflation. They have masses ranging from values typical of planets ($10^{-6} M_\odot$) to MBHs ($10^6 M_\odot$), and may have arisen due to sudden changes in the relativistic fluid's radiation pressure, as particles decouple or condense throughout the thermal history of the Universe [70].

PBHs accreting from the intergalactic medium (IGM) would distort the temperature and polarization anisotropies of the CMB. This limits the total mass density in PBHs in the $10^5–10^6 M_\odot$ range to a small fraction of the DM density [11, 204]. However, depending on the details of the geometry of the accretion, the limit allows a PBH density up to that of present-day MBHs (e.g. [284]). Therefore, massive PBHs remain viable as seeds of rare early quasars. In the matter era, these MBHs act as seeds for structure formation [69, 80]. They could form discs very early and grow via gas accretion to gigantic sizes ($10^9–10^{11} M_\odot$) during the age of the Universe. Their growth occurs mainly through gas accretion, but there is a possibility that they merge to form massive clusters of PBHs with a wide mass distribution, segregated in mass with the most massive at the centre due to dynamical friction, and the least massive orbiting or even evaporating from these clusters and thus constituting a dif-fuse uniform component of DM. In that case, one expects a large rate of hyperbolic encounters [112] as well as multiple EMRs and IMRs, at high redshifts, which are
primary targets of the sub milli-Hz frequency band probed by µAres (see IMRI tracks in Fig. 1).

**Population of MBHs in low-redshift dwarf galaxies** While MBHs are found to inhabit all massive galaxies, both at low and high redshift, their presence in low-mass systems has not been confirmed yet, with only some candidates detected to date as low-luminosity active galactic nuclei (AGN, e.g. [185, 212]). These objects represent the low-mass end of the MBH luminosity function, with masses of about $10^4-10^5 M_\odot$, and perfectly sample the halo mass regime where different seeding scenarios predict strong variations in the BH halo occupation fraction (e.g. [41, 125, 274]).

Because of the typically low gas densities and the low accretion rates onto the MBH in low-mass galaxies, those systems likely keep their memory of the initial seeding process, and their mass distribution nowadays would closely resemble the initial one. However, because of their mostly quiescent life, their detection via EM radiation would be very challenging. A unique opportunity to reveal their presence is represented by GW emission when they inspiral and coalesce with similar or more massive companions. Recently, [255] investigated the MBH pairing in dwarf galaxy mergers by means of extremely high-resolution numerical simulations, finding that the DM distribution plays a crucial role in the MBH evolution, with cored profiles resulting in the MBHs stalling at a few hundred pc separations. Nevertheless, we are still far away from a clear picture, especially because of the missing gas (and star formation) physics, that could strongly affect the inspiral (e.g. [105, 174, 244, 254, 269]).

Given the relatively quiet evolution of dwarf galaxies, it is quite likely that the overall cosmic merger rate of the MBH they host is $\ll 1 \text{ yr}^{-1}$ at low redshifts, thus escaping detection at milli-Hz frequencies. Conversely, µAres increased sensitivity at low frequency will allow detection of equal-mass inspiralling $10^5 (10^4) M_\odot$ binaries at $z = 0.1$ already $10^4 (10^3)$ years before the merger, offering the unique opportunity of detecting several such systems in the local Universe even if they merge at a rate that is $\ll 1 \text{ yr}^{-1}$. A practical example is shown in Fig. 3. In this specific population model, $\approx 50 (10)$ inspiralling MBHBs with primary mass $< 10^5 (10^4) M_\odot$ are detected at $z < 0.5$. Note that the coalescence time is > 10 years for all of them and none would be detected by LISA. The detection of such a population will provide crucial information on the number of MBHBs in dwarf galaxies, putting constraints on the main seeding scenarios. Accurate measurements of the GW phase evolution will also allow to test the presence of DM spikes/cusps, which are predicted by cold DM models to gradually build-up undisturbed over a Hubble time in the quiet surroundings of MBHs hosted in dwarf galaxies [123].

### 3.1.3 The physics of MBHB pairing

The detailed physics of MBHB pairing is in itself very uncertain. It is generally accepted that following galaxy mergers, MBHs are delivered to the centre of the merger remnant by dynamical friction [75], eventually forming a Keplerian binary on $\sim$pc scales ([39]; for recent works, see, e.g. [60, 61, 152, 199]). Further hardening
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 3** Primary MBH mass vs observed frequency (top) and time to coalescence (bottom) for an illustrative local ($z < 0.5$) inspiralling MBHBs population detected by µAres with SNR> 8, from model *HS-delayed* of [49]</figcaption></figure>

of the binary, down to ~millipc scales, is required to reach final coalescence via GW emission. The underlying physics driving this process is poorly understood (see [96], for a review). In recent years, three-body scattering against the stellar background has been established as a viable route to coalescence (e.g. [150, 205, 208]). Similarly, in gas-rich environments, the formation of a massive circumbinary disc can extract energy and angular momentum from the binary, driving it to final coalescence (e.g. [85].) If the aforementioned mechanisms fail, subsequent galaxy mergers will eventually bring a third MBH into play, prompting the formation of MBH triplets, that have been shown to drive the pre-existing binary to the GW emission stage in a large (≈ 30%) fraction of cases [13, 48, 221]. MBHB pairing and coalescence can also be prompted by the inspiral of IMBHs hosted in star and globular clusters [202]. The interplay and relative importance of the aforementioned mechanisms is hardly known, leaving a number of outstanding questions unanswered.

**How efficient are stellar and gas dynamics in driving the binary to coalescence?** Stellar hardening critically depends on the refilling rate of the binary loss cone and, especially in massive galaxies featuring low density cores, can proceed on characteristic time-scales up to Gyrs [209, 233, 270]. On the other hand, MBHBs evolving in spirals and dwarf elliptical galaxies are expected to merge efficiently within few hundred Myrs due to rotation and higher central stellar densities of their hosts [151]. When it comes to gas dynamics, even the understanding of the detailed physics establishing the sign of the gas torques exerted by the disc (i.e. whether the binary inspirals or outspirals), is incomplete. In fact, the net torque arises from a small asymmetry in
the shape of the gas distribution near the edges of the minidiscs ahead of and behind the MBHs [217], which are hard to resolve properly. According to recent studies, the binary inspiral time can be of a few million years for disc densities corresponding to an accretion rate normalized to 0.3 times the Eddington value [256]. However, given the dependence of this result on the small asymmetry in the gas distribution near the BHs, one has to keep in mind that 3D effects, radiation pressure, winds, etc. are likely to modify this time-scale significantly. Likewise, apart from additional physical effects, the subtlety of the torques also make them susceptible to numerical issues. Several works recently found positive torques, resulting in widening, rather than shrinking, the MBHB orbit [186, 188, 256].

**How often do triple (and multiple) systems form and what is their role in the MBH build-up?** This depends critically on the ratio between the typical time elapsed in between galaxy mergers and the lifetime of MBHBs. If binary shrinking time-scales are long, formation of multiple MBH systems might be the norm, with consequences for galactic core scouring and MBH ejection in the galaxy outskirts and IGM [49, 221].

**Can IMBHs be effectively delivered to the centre of massive galaxies and what is their role in MBH build-up?** Galaxies are known to host from hundreds (for Milky-Way (MW) sized galaxies) up to thousands of star clusters (for massive ellipticals). According to numerical simulations, up to 20% of such clusters could harbour an IMBH [120]. Clusters forming in the inner region of a galaxy, ~1 kpc, can spiral toward the galactic centre via dynamical friction [266], releasing the central IMBH in the dense galactic nuclei. This mechanism has been advocated to explain MBH seeding and growth [99]. This scenario predicts the unavoidable formation of binaries, triplets, or even multiplets comprised of a MBH and several IMBHs (e.g. [16, 17, 181]). Clearly, the number of IMBHs that can get close to a MBH depends critically on several assumptions, like the clusters' formation efficiency, the IMBH formation probability, and the galaxy structure. For a MW-sized galaxy, one can expect that, out of $O(100)$ clusters, only ~20–30 have the conditions to seed an IMBH [18], and only 1–2 can reach the centre, undergoing efficient merger within ~1 Gyr. In massive elliptical galaxies, instead, the number of IMBHs that can be packed in the centre of a galaxy can be as high as $O(10–100)$. Massive galaxies are expected to host MBHs, with $M > 10^7$ M$_{\odot}$. Therefore, these systems might host the formation of MBH-IMBH pairs with a mass ratio $q < 10^3$. These EMRI/IMRI-like systems can form at relatively low redshift, and can constitute loud GW sources in the $10^{-5}–10^{-4}$ Hz frequency band.

**A μ-Hz GW detector like μAres is best placed to answer these questions, by catching MBHBs already during the early adiabatic inspiral (bottom right panel of Fig. 2), where their coupling with the environment can still leave distinctive signatures.** First, each shrinking mechanism is expected to produce different eccentricity distributions [49, 216], which can be easily measured during the inspiral with $10^{-4}$ precision [193]. Second, in the case of gaseous drag, it might be possible to directly
measure the effect of gas drag on the GW waveform. This should be the case especially for stellar-mass BHs or IMBHs merging with a MBH, for which the lighter companion results in a lower chirp mass and weaker GW torques, but stronger gas torques [91]. At the high SNR measurements expected from µAres, the magnitude and frequency-dependence of the deviation from vacuum waveforms can be easily disentangled from uncertainties in the MBH binary parameters, allowing precise measurement of the effects of dynamical friction, disc migration and accretion [29, 158]. Finally, MBH-IMBH of $10^8 M_{\odot} + 10^4 M_{\odot}$ at $z < 2$ can be in principle detected with high SNR thousands of years prior to coalescence (see tracks in Fig. 1). This leaves the intriguing possibility of observing directly in the waveform the complex dynamics generated by the inspiral of multiple IMBHs into a SMBH.

**Summary of MBH science goals:**

- probe the emergence of the high-redshift quasars;

- establish the relative importance of accretion vs mergers in growing MBHs;

- disentangle seed formation models at the high-mass end of the seed spectrum;

- probe the population of inspiralling MBHs in low-redshift dwarf galaxies;

- pin down the physics of MBHB dynamics, including stellar hardening, gaseous drag, triplets, and multiplets MBH interactions;

- probe the formation and dynamics of IMBHs in galactic nuclei.

## 3.2 Multimessenger and multiband view

One of the major strengths of a µ-Hz GW detector lies in its unparalleled potential for multimessenger and multiband science involving BHBs across the entire mass spectrum, as detailed below.

### 3.2.1 Multimessenger observations of MBHBs

Unlike stellar-origin BH mergers, mergers involving MBHBs are expected to occur in the gas-rich central regions of galaxy mergers, and to produce copious EM signatures. Such EM signatures, combined with GWs, can deliver much more science than either one by itself. Roughly, the gains can be divided for “astrophysics” and for “fundamental physics”. On the astrophysics side, tracing out the merger history of MBHs, together with their specific host galaxies, will shed light on the co-evolution of MBHs and galaxies – a long-standing problem [159]. This requires unique identification of the host galaxy for each merger, for a large population of merger events, which is unlikely to be fully accomplished by LISA. Also on the astrophysics side, the GWs will yield precise system parameter estimates. This will enable an unprecedented study of (binary) accretion onto MBHs whose masses, spins, and orbital parameters are known ab initio. On the fundamental physics side, a measurement of the redshift from the EM spectral observations will enable the cosmological use of chirping MBHBs as standard sirens, in a way that is highly synergistic with corresponding Type Ia supernova standard candles, see Section 3.4.2. A comparison
between Hubble diagrams from standard sirens (with distances based on graviton
measurements) and purely EM standard candles will serve to probe long-range devi-
ations from standard GR (such as extra dimensions) since in models beyond GR,
these Hubble diagrams can disagree (e.g. [40, 89]). A determination of a time delay
between the arrival of gravitons and photons will constrain massive gravity theories
(see also Section 3.3), since the graviton speed, and hence the time delay, depends on
the graviton's rest mass. The frequency-dependence of this time delay would probe
Lorentz invariance [157].

In principle, merging MBHs can have several distinct EM signatures, before, dur-
ing, and after the merger. Prior to merger, a promising signal is a quasi-periodic EM
“chirp”, tracking the phase of the GWs [129, 257]. Because of copious shock-heating,
gas near the MBHs is expected to be unusually hot [47, 50, 239]. The corresponding
UV/X-ray emission would have different (harder) spectra, with possible signatures
of a disc cavity, and display periodicity on the orbital time-scale of days to minutes
(years to days prior to merger). Doppler effects could increase variability over time,
tracking the GW chirp [129, 227]. At merger proper, the energetic burst of GWs may
be accompanied by a luminous X-ray flare from the tidal “squeezing” of gas (e.g. [21,
71, 76]), EM signatures of the turn-on of a relativistic jet, or other flares from any
direct coupling between the GWs and the surrounding plasma [149]. Finally, in the
coalescence aftermath, any circumbinary gas is expected to develop strong prompt
shocks after the merger of the binary, due to the effectively instant mass-loss and
centre-of-mass recoil of the remnant MBH. These should lead to a bright afterglow,
whose nature depends on the amount and configuration of the nearby gas. In the case
of a thin circumbinary disc, the afterglow should display a characteristic increase in
both spectral hardness and overall brightness, on time-scales of weeks to years (e.g.
[83, 171, 218, 226]).

In the absence of an ab-initio understanding of binary accretion and the corre-
sponding spectral evolution properties of the above signatures, the most robust is
likely to be the pre-merger periodic modulations, which are inevitably caused by the
binary’s orbital motion (the exception is if the binary is surrounded by optically thick
gas, with the photosphere well outside the binary). In order to allow a measurement
of the coincident EM chirp, and phasing it relative to the GWs over several hun-
dred cycles, the sources need to be localized on the sky weeks to months prior to
merger (depending on the chirp mass). Since most merging binaries will also be at
high redshift and faint, ideally the localization should be good enough to fit in the
arcminute field of view of sensitive instruments (rather than the degree field of view
of less sensitive survey telescopes). This is beyond the capability of LISA as currently
planned.

By operating for a decade down to µ-Hz frequencies, µAres can monitor up to
thousands of inspiralling and hundreds of merging binaries with high SNR (see
Fig. 1). Inspiralling systems can be observed slowly chirping for the whole mission
duration, yielding precise information on *f* and *f*', besides measuring the binary
masses and luminosity distance within ≈ 10% and the location in the sky within
<100 deg². Conversely, merging systems with *M* > 10⁵ M☉ at *z* < 5 can be local-
ized within 1 deg² up to a year before final coalescence. Figure 4 shows the median
sky localization accuracy that a µAres-class instrument can achieve on selected
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

**Fig. 4** Median sky location precision as a function of time to coalescence for selected systems, as labelled in the figure. Each curve is generated by simulating 1000 systems with random sky localization, inclination, polarization, and spin parameters. Results are obtained in the Fisher Matrix approximation, using the inspiral-only waveform described in [154], which includes spin precession and higher harmonics. Sky localization at merger is rescaled with the gain in SNR squared computed by using IMR PhenomC waveforms [224]. Caveat: these curves have to be considered as illustrative only. In fact, the Fisher Matrix calculations coupled the µAres sensitivity curve shown in Fig. 1 with the LISA time dependent response function, as a consistent one for µAres was not yet available. We stress, however, that µAres' two constellations, at an angle with respect to each other, allow us to disentangle the two GW polarisations instantly regardless of the location of the source in the sky, and the Martian orbit offers a Doppler modulation comparable to that of LISA. We therefore expect the same level of information to be encoded in the µAres response function

MBHBs as a function of time to coalescence. Most sources at $z < 5$ will be localized at $\mathcal{O}(10 \text{ deg}^2)$ precision several months before mergers, allowing continuous monitoring with instruments such as the Rubin Observatory (previously known as LSST) or SKA. Typical sky location at merger are generally known better than 100 arcmin$^2$, which will allow pointing with ultra-sensitive X-ray telescopes of the Athena and Lynx class.

### 3.2.2 Multiband at the two ends of the BH mass spectrum

µAres will connect the milli-Hz window probed by the first generation of space-based detectors (i.e. LISA) with the nano-Hz regime probed by PTAs. By the late 2040s, it is conceivable that SKA will be operational at full sensitivity for about 20 years. SKA will pierce through the low frequency SGWB produced by MBHBs, constraining their merger rate and possibly their dynamical properties [77]. It will likely also allow the detection of several particularly massive and/or nearby systems, possibly allowing for a decent sky localization of $\mathcal{O}(100)$ deg$^2$ [234]. A µ-Hz GW detector will complement these findings with a precise estimate of the SGWB at $3 \times 10^{-7} < f < 10^{-5}$ Hz, and by detecting several massive low-redshift systems down to $f < 1$ µHz (see Fig. 1). These complementary observations will provide a full characterization of the MBHB population and their environment including, in
the case of counterpart detection, how the host properties change across the mass spectrum and redshift. There is even a small chance that a source observed by SKA will inspiral and merge to be detectable in the µAres band within the detector lifetime [245].

At the opposite end of the spectrum, a mission on a Mars orbit, will even allow a comparative better sensitivity at few milli-Hz compared to LISA (see Fig. 1). This allows a 10-fold increase in the number of extragalactic stellar-origin BHBs detectable at those frequencies. Larger statistics of individually resolvable objects will facilitate the discrimination of different formation channels based on the eccentricity of the sources [55, 194], which can be combined with 3G findings to provide a complete view of the cosmic BHB population. We note that a few sources will also cross to the 3G band to become genuine multiband systems. The same holds true for any system involving IMBHs. This specific piece of multiband science, however, is better addressed with a deci-Hz detector, as exposed in a companion White Paper [19], and is not further considered here.

**Summary of multimessenger and multiband science goals:**

- identify the characteristic signatures of inspiralling MBHBs, providing the key to search for them in millions of AGN spectra and lightcurves;

- investigate the interplay between gravity, matter, and light in the dynamical spacetime of inspiralling/merging MBHBs;

- establish the connection between MBHBs and their hosts;

- provide a unique sample of standard sirens out to $z \gtrsim 5$;

- fully characterize the MBHB population at low frequency, in connection with PTAs.

## 3.3 General relativity and beyond

**Strong lensing** Strongly lensed GWs may be detected via frequency-dependent effects, such as diffraction and interference [225]. These wave effects can help identify the properties of the gravitational lens as the source's frequency increases toward coalescence [249]. A µ-Hz mission like µAres will be able to detect wave effects for lenses with $10^7 < M/M_{\odot} < 10^{10}$ (for $f \sim 1$µHz–10mHz), extending the range accessible to LISA towards higher masses. Lens characterization (redshifted mass and impact parameter) can be improved by at least a factor $\sim 2$ with respect to LISA based on the sensitivity curve. Based on the estimates for LISA, for which a few strongly lensed signals can be detected [231], µAres could detect dozens or more strong lensed MBHBs including systems well before merger, thanks also to the longer mission duration, and would have sensitivity to detect wave effects for more massive haloes due to the lower frequency range. Detecting strong lenses has potential applications for probing the matter substructure and the expansion of the Universe [232].
Due to the motion of the detectors, multiple ‘images’ from the same GW event arriving at different times will have different localisation patterns. Combining the information from different images can reduce the uncertainty in localisation significantly [236], potentially by three orders-of-magnitude. More stringent localisation constraints will enable better tests of GR through polarization measurements [250], and will help us to perform cosmography up to $z \approx 10$ [232].

**Memory effect** Another interesting target for a low-frequency space-based detector is the so-called GW *memory*, i.e. the permanent relative displacement between two probe masses following the passage of GWs. There are two types of memory effects: linear [53, 285] and nonlinear [45, 78]. The nonlinear memory effect originates from the non-linearities in the Einstein field equations and therefore provides a direct test of GR in the strong regime. The nonlinear memory effect can be physically interpreted as the signal generated by the gravitons radiated from the system [262]. It is possible to detect the build-up of the memory during the evolution of the MBHB [104]. A 4-year LISA mission may detect at most 1-10 memory events with SNR larger than 5 (see [141]), but more numerous, higher-SNR events would be possible with a lower-frequency detector (see Fig. 5). A detection of the memory effect would have important implications for theoretical physics, because it has recently been shown that there are deep connections between gravitational memory, BMS supertranslations, Weinberg’s formula for soft graviton production, and the black hole information paradox (see e.g. [81, 132, 248]).

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 5** Example signals from the memory effect compared to the µAres sensitivity curve. The spectrum of the signals are calculated based on the derivations done in [141]. The value of the redshift was chosen to be $z = 4$. Both MBHBs were chosen to have components of equal mass. The green curve corresponds to the $M = 10^7 M_\odot$ and the orange curve corresponds to $M = 10^9 M_\odot$. The values for the characteristic timescale of the memory rise is inverse proportional to the frequency at coalescence and were chosen to be $\tau = 100$ s and $\tau = 10000$ s for the green and orange curve respectively</figcaption></figure>
**Dipole radiation/modification of GR** Low frequency detectors provide new opportu-
nities for detecting deviations from GR in the propagation of GWs [101]. µAres
will be able to perform these tests beyond the capacity of LISA [40]. Graviton mass
bounds from the modified dispersion relation would benefit both from the lower fre-
quency and increased SNR [88]. A µ-Hz mission has the potential to constrain the
graviton mass to a precision of $m_g \lesssim 10^{-29}$eV, two orders of magnitude better than
LISA. Many alternatives to GR predict GW oscillations, an effect similar to neutrino
flavour oscillations [182]. A lower frequency would improve tests of GW oscilla-
tions considerably, with a precision factor gain comparable to that of the graviton
mass. There are other effects beyond GR that affect GW propagation in a frequency-
independent manner (e.g. GW speed and damping). A µ-Hz detector will constrain
those effects at a lower energy scale, well below the cutoff scale for dark energy
effective theories [87].

In GR, quadrupole radiation is the leading-order GW effect for an inspiralling
binary. In modified theories of gravity the strong equivalence principle is generally
violated [278], allowing for the existence of dipole radiation [30, 44]. For exam-
ple, depending on the detailed field/curvature couplings in the scalar-tensor gravity,
black holes [27, 283] and neutron stars [28, 197, 279] can acquire scalar charges,
even in a nonperturbative way [86, 94, 238, 240]. Because dipole radiation affects
the waveform phase at a lower post-Newtonian order than the quadrupole radia-
tion, very low-frequency observations with a space-based GW detector can either
reveal it or yield very tight constraints. For a massive black hole binary, the improve-
ment in the low-frequency band greatly improves parameter estimation, by providing
much better sky localization, mass measurements, and so on [43]. This is important
because strong-field effects (such as black hole scalarization, see e.g. [240], depend-
ing on the theory parameters, in principle can happen in specific mass ranges, and
dipolar radiation would mostly affect gravitational radiation at low frequencies. The
prospects to obtain more accurate tests of modified gravity also apply to other types
of gravitational-wave sources [74], including DWDs [172].

**Black-hole spectroscopy** GW emission during the post-merger “ringdown” phase is a superposition of damped-oscillation modes called quasinormal modes (QNMs). The spectrum of these modes depends only on the geometry of the final BH, and therefore the QNM spectrum is a unique fingerprint of the remnant. While LISA can “hear” ringdown from $10^9 M_{\odot}$ BHs only for $z < 1$ [24], µAres will see very large ringdown SNRs (~1000) even at redshifts as large as 10. This will allow precise measurements of the remnant’s spin and mass with fractional errors as low as $O(10^{-3})$ at $z = 10$. The quadrupole mode will still dominate the emission, but µAres will also see a large number of higher harmonics (up to $l = 7$). These higher-order modes will significantly improve sky localization and distance estimation, and they will also provide incontrovertible evidence that these supermassive objects are indeed Kerr black holes: in GR the QNM frequencies depend only on the BH’s mass and spin, and the consistency between different mode frequencies would break if the modes were to depend on any other parameters of the source.
**Summary of General relativity and beyond science goals:**

- probe DM substructures and the Universe expansion via strong GW lensing;

- detect non-linear GW memory with high SNR from merging MBHBs;

- improve sensitivity to graviton mass and other deviations from GR by more than two orders of magnitude with respect to LISA.

## 3.4 Cosmology and cosmography

### 3.4.1 Early-Universe cosmology

GWs can carry unique information about the state of the Universe at energy scales far beyond the reach of EM cosmological observables. GW sources operating in the early Universe generate an SGWB. Its characteristic frequency today can be related to the Hubble factor at generation time $H_*$ [63]

$$f = \frac{k}{2\pi} \frac{a_*}{a_0} = 2.6 \times 10^{-8} \text{ Hz} \left(\frac{k}{H_*}\right) \left(\frac{g_*(T_*)}{100}\right)^{1/6} \frac{T_*}{\text{GeV}} \quad (1)$$

where $a_*$ and $a_0$ are the scale factors at generation and today, $T_*$ and $g_*(T_*)$ the Universe temperature and the number of relativistic degrees of freedom at generation (the second equality holds in the radiation dominated era). $k$ is the physical wave-number at the time of GW production, which for causality reasons must satisfy $k < H_*$. Apart from the factor $k/H_*$ which, as we will see, depends on the details of the GW source, (1) relates the temperature of SGWB production epoch to the signal frequency, showing that GW observatories in different frequency ranges probe GW emission from different energy scales in the early Universe. There are mainly two classes of SGWB sources operating in the early Universe: those related to inflation and subsequent processes (such as reheating), and those related to primordial phase transitions.

**Inflation** A SGWB is generically expected in the standard slow-roll inflationary scenario, extending in frequency with a slightly red-tilted spectrum from the horizon scale today to the one corresponding to the energy scale of inflation, i.e. $10^{-19} < f < 10^{11}$ Hz (assuming inflation is occurring at the highest energy scale allowed by CMB observations, i.e. $10^{16}$ GeV – for a review, see e.g. [63]). Even though this signal interests the frequency detection range of all present and future GW detectors, measuring it is extremely challenging because of its low amplitude. At low frequencies $f < 10^{-16}$ Hz, this SGWB is also the target of CMB experiments, through the measurement of the B-mode polarisation (for a complete treatment, see e.g. [98]). The present upper bound by the Planck satellite on the tensor to scalar ratio is $r < 0.07$ [201], translating into $h^2\Omega_{gw} < 3 \times 10^{-16}$ (assuming no spectral tilt). This is expected to improve in the near future. The timescale for CMB ground-based experiments is such that the Simons Array [9] might bound $r < 2 \times 10^{-3}$ by 2021 – 2025 (the dates bound the start of taking data and the availability of results), and CMB stage IV [2] might reach $r < 10^{-3}$ by 2027 – 2031. Concerning satellites, LiteBird [133] will reach $r < 6 \times 10^{-4}$ by 2027 – 2032, and proposed satellites such as PICO
and COrE might reach $r < 10^{-4}$, which is the lowest bound CMB experiments can technically reach. In the case of no positive detection by CMB before 2050, future direct GW detection should therefore do better than $h^2\Omega_{gw} \sim 2 \times 10^{-19}$ (corresponding to $r = 10^{-4}$), which is far below the sensitivity of any GW mission under study. Note that there are scenarios, going beyond standard slow-roll inflation, in which the predicted SGWB spectral tilt becomes blue at high frequency, thereby opening up the possibility of a direct GW detection of the inflationary SGWB (e.g. [82]; for a review, see [35]). This would constitute a major discovery, as it amounts to probing the inflationary potential near the end of inflation, which is observationally unconstrained. Consequently, it would bring extremely relevant information about inflation and the high energy physics model underlying it. On the other hand, among the proposed scenarios, none provides a signal specifically compelling for μAres.

**Phase transitions** The situation is different for sources connected to primordial phase transitions. In particular, a first order phase transition in the early Universe can generate a SGWB via collisions of true-vacuum bubbles and the subsequent bulk motion in the Universe plasma (see e.g. [65, 122, 135, 136, 148, 163]). In this case, the SGWB is expected to peak at a frequency scale set by the size of the bubbles when they collide $R_* \sim v_w/\beta$ [68], where $v_w$ is the bubble wall speed and $1/\beta$ denotes the duration of the phase transition (therefore $k/H_* \sim 2\pi\beta/(v_w H_*)$, c.f (1)).

Two phase transitions (PT) certainly occurred in the early Universe, the Quantum ChromoDynamics (QCD) one at an energy scale of $T_* \sim 100$ MeV and the electroweak one at $T_* \sim 100$ GeV. In the context of the standard model of particle physics, they are both crossovers rather than first order [84, 146, 247]. However, the order of the QCD PT depends on the baryochemical potential, and there are hints that it might become first order if the lepton asymmetry is large in the early Universe, as expected when e.g. a sterile neutrino is the DM [52, 230]. The SGWB from a first order QCD PT has been analysed in the context of PTA [66]. Since the frequency range of PTA observatories corresponds to $k \sim H_*$ at the energy scale $T_* = 100$ MeV (see (1)), PTA can only probe very slow QCD PTs featuring $\beta/H_*$ of $O(1)$ or smaller. A weaker and briefer first order PT instead seems more likely [36, 62, 103, 170]. A detector operating in the μ-Hz range would vastly improve our capability to investigate the cosmological QCD PT, as it would be sensitive to much wider regions of the PT parameter space, covering $10 \lesssim \beta/H_* \lesssim 10^9$. With a power law sensitivity reaching down to $h^2\Omega_{gw} \sim 6 \cdot 10^{-17}$ (see Fig. 6), μAres has the potential to measure the SGWB from a weakly first order QCD PT with vacuum energy density of the order of 3% of the radiation energy density in the Universe, happening e.g. if $\beta/H_* = O(100)$ and $v_w = O(0.1)$.

Similarly, the EWPT is not necessarily a crossover. Well motivated scenarios beyond the standard model (BSM) predict a first order EWPT, often together with baryogenesis processes [42, 57, 58, 68, 72, 73, 95, 147, 164, 184]. The detection of the EWPT SGWB would be an unquestionable proof that there exists BSM physics at the TeV scale. μAres may provide such a proof not necessarily after a BSM discovery at colliders. Both the Future Circular Collider and the International Linear Collider will be unable to fully test the parameter space leading to the first order
<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 6** µAres power law sensitivity (PLS) curves to SGWBs, obtained following the procedure outlined in [67], assuming a threshold SNR= 10 for detection. µAres reaches down to $h^2\Omega_{gw} \sim 6 \times 10^{-17}$ at $2 \times 10^{-4}$ Hz, for comparison LISA is expected to get to $h^2\Omega_{gw} \sim 2 \times 10^{-13}$ at $3 \times 10^{-3}$ Hz</figcaption></figure>

EWPT [1, 111]. So, independently of the collider findings, a strong EWPT will still be a compelling case in 2050.

A first-order PT, not connected to the EWPT, can be also one of the few smoking guns of DM. The ongoing DM searches are indeed cornering most of standard DM paradigms, motivating scenarios where the DM particle lies in a hidden sector. In this case, the interaction between DM and the SM particles is negligible, killing any hope to detect the DM particle via its non-gravitational effects. The detection of (or constraints on) a phase transition occurring in the hidden sectors would thus unveil some key features, e.g. the mass scale of the DM sector. Interestingly, the first order phase transition occurs both if the hidden sector has a QCD-like structure (with different parameters in the Columbian plot [229, 247]), or a BSM Higgs-like potential (with the electroweak scale replaced by the hidden-sector scale) [68]. µAres has the capabilities to probe hidden sectors when their energy scales are in the $10^{-2} – 10^6$ GeV range. In view of the hidden PTs, µAres is a particularly valuable experiment succeeding SKA and LISA: if LISA observes a SGWB from PT, µAres reconstructs the signal in a broader frequency band and with higher accuracy (see e.g. [67, 106]); if SKA detects the PT signal, µAres measures the high-frequency tail of the signal encoding the particle physics interactions in the plasma; and if neither LISA nor SKA measure the PT signal, µAres has still the chance to detect it by accessing a wider parameter space (e.g. around two orders of magnitude in $\beta/H$).

A primordial phase transition can also lead to the formation of topological defects [153]. Among these, local cosmic strings are the most interesting in this context, as they can be powerful SGWB sources (see e.g. [268]). However, the SGWB spectrum peaks at a frequency scaling as $f_{\text{peak}} \propto (G\mu)^{-1}$ ($\mu$ being the string linear energy density). From this scaling, it appears that low frequency detectors are less powerful in constraining $G\mu$.

It is extremely important to remark, that above we have assumed the absence of a SGWB foreground of astrophysical origin, masking the cosmological signal. The detection of an astrophysical SGWB, for example from stellar-mass BBH and/or
NSB, would also constitute a major discovery, but it is expected to occur on a shorter timescale, by Earth-based interferometers and/or LISA. In the context of later detectors, it is important that the data processing provides an efficient “cleaning” of astrophysical SGWB foregrounds. Otherwise, the above-mentioned science would not be lost, but the efficiency in constraining models and their parameter space would be correspondingly reduced.

### 3.4.2 Late-Universe cosmology

The late time expansion of the Universe can be probed with standard sirens: compact binary coalescence for which an accurate measurement of both the luminosity distance (from GWs) and the associated redshift (from EM observations) can be obtained [228]. With these two quantities in hand, one can test the standard cosmological distance-redshift relation which in turn yields constraints on the cosmological parameters. Both stellar origin BHBs and BNSs are excellent examples of standard sirens. BNSs can be associated with an EM counterpart measurement, in which case a unique redshift can be associated with the GW event providing a single point in the distance-redshift diagram, as spectacularly demonstrated by GW170817 [8]. Stellar mass BHBs instead are believed to not produce EM counterparts, in which case redshift information can be recovered only by cross-correlating the localization volume of the GW event with galaxy catalogues. For these sources thus one can only construct posterior distribution in the distance-redshift diagram, describing the probability of the redshift associated with the GW event based on the distribution of galaxies within the GW localization volume, as first demonstrated by GW170817 [107] and GW170814 [242].

At sub milli-Hz frequencies instead, the most powerful standard sirens that one might hope to exploit are MBHB mergers. These are already the main cosmological sources for LISA, which will be able to detect up to a few tens of them with EM counterparts, testing the expansion of the Universe at high redshift, up to $z \sim 10$ [252]. The results obtained with simulations for LISA shows that MBHBs will be ideal standard sirens to test deviations from $\Lambda$CDM at high redshift, specifically in the range $2 < z < 5$ [59, 64]. They will not, however, be detected in sufficient number to yield competitive constraints on the Hubble constant or the equation of state of dark energy, but will be extremely useful to test deviation in the cosmological propagation of GWs [40].

The low-frequency performance of µAres will improve the cosmological analysis performed with LISA mainly in two ways. On the one hand a large improvement with respect to LISA will come from the better measurements of the MBHBs parameters, due to the much longer observation of the inspiral phase (up to the mission duration of 10 years). Although the contribution of weak lensing will still dominate the distance error budget (3-5% at $z = 3$ [198]), the determination of the sky position should be greatly enhanced, reducing the localization region of the GW event and thus increasing the probability of finding an EM counterpart (see Fig. 4). In the optimistic case in which all merging MBHBs will have associated EM counterparts,
μAres will increase the number of standard sirens accessible to LISA by a factor of ten, dramatically improving the cosmological analyses. This will allow a measurement of the Hubble constant at the percent or sub-percent level and the placement of tight constraints on deviations from ΛCDM and from GR at very high redshift. The improvement of the sensitivity at low frequency could moreover bring more detections at even higher redshift, specifically at $z > 5$. This will help in expanding the cosmological investigations performed with LISA to larger distances, and thus in particular to test deviation from ΛCDM or from GR at even larger scales. On the other hand the number of non-merging MBHBs is expected to be much higher than the merging ones (see Fig. 2). Although for these inspiralling MBHBs the sky localization should be of $O(10\text{deg}^2)$ only, with an associated luminosity distance relative error of ≈ 10%, continuous EM observations in the localization region could spot the hosting galaxy through some specific EM signatures, which might for example be constituted by some periodic variability or AGN transient activity, as envisaged in Section 3.2. Even though the true hosting galaxy is not identified, one might also be able to reduce the number of credible hosts within the localization region, possibly to a few tens or fewer galaxies. This would allow us to use them as dark sirens and thus apply the statistical method to extract cosmological information by cross-correlating with galaxy catalogues. In any case these considerations lead us to the possibility to have an additional set of MBHB standard sirens at high redshift, possibly up to thousands. μAres would therefore greatly exceed the cosmological potential of LISA, leading to strong constraints on the standard cosmological model and accurate tests of GR at very high redshift.

Beside MBHBs, also stellar origin BHBs [90] and EMRs [177] can be valuable standard sirens. Both types of sources are best observed at $f > 10^{-3}$ Hz, where the μAres sensitivity can be ≈ 3 times better than LISA. It should be noted, however, that none of those sources is expected to generate a detectable EM counterpart and statistical methods to cross-correlate their localization volumes with galaxy catalogues in order to obtain redshift information, are needed [90, 167]. Those methods are effective so long as localization volumes are significantly smaller than the typical scale over which the matter content of the Universe is approximately homogeneous, which applies only to relatively low $z$ sources detected at high SNRs. Therefore, although μAres can potentially do better than LISA also on this ground, detailed calculations are needed to quantify whether the improvement is significant.

**Summary of cosmology and cosmography science goals:**

- investigate a vast region of the allowed parameter space of QCD phase transitions;

- explore beyond standard physics by searching for an EW phase transition;

- explore first order phase transitions in the hidden sector;

- probe the geometry of the Universe, constraining deviations from ΛCDM out to $z \approx 10$ by means of $O(10^3)$ MBHB standard sirens.
## 3.5 The Milky Way

### 3.5.1 A panorama of stellar binaries

The Milky Way is composed of roughly 100 billion stars, with a significant fraction close enough to a companion star to experience binary interactions throughout the evolution. Despite the ubiquity of binary systems, their signatures across the EM spectrum and recent detection of GW from mergers of compact binaries, major open questions remain unsolved (see [203] for a review). Current topics of research include the different mechanisms for mass transfer, its stability and outcomes, core-collapse supernova kicks, the nature of Type Ia supernova progenitors, mass and angular momentum loss and binary merger products [143, 176, 276]. The low frequency GW band is populated by a large variety of stellar-origin Galactic GW sources that will be crucial for understanding open issues in binary evolution. The μ-Hz GW band will open a new window to binaries composed of a CO with a non-degenerate (main sequence or brown dwarf) star, while also hosting binaries in which both stars are COs but remain undetectable in the LISA band (milli-Hz frequencies) due to longer orbital periods. Many of these are likely to have bright EM counterparts (those including NSs are even detectable in multiple EM wavebands) enabling new Galactic multimessenger studies. These studies will help to constrain binary evolution models and to pin down the formation of rare binary systems. Furthermore, this adds to the bigger open question of understanding the formation and evolution of COs and binaries in the global context of the evolution of galaxies, including the Milky Way. Contrary to EM surveys, the major advantage is that GWs are not hindered by dust extinction and crowding, making them ideal for driving Galactic studies of these sources as well as complementing EM studies at all latitudes [162, 169]. Moreover, GWs from CO binaries can be observed throughout the entire Local Group facilitating multimessenger near-field cosmology [161], while circumbinary companions can be detected through GW radial velocity measurements [207, 215, 251, 253, 280].

Much like at the LISA milli-Hz band, the extreme number of sources detectable at μ-Hz will result in a strong Galactic foreground of unresolvable sources (see Fig. 1). This foreground can be useful as it contains an imprint of the overall properties and past history of the Galaxy.

**Galactic double white dwarfs** The hundreds of millions of DWD that are currently present in the Milky Way emit across the entire GW spectrum. Population synthesis models predict DWD systems, that undergo binary interactions during their evolution, span a vast frequency range from $10^{-7}$ to $10^{-2}$ Hz [265] while optical observations typically cover $10^{-5}$ – $10^{-2}$ Hz frequencies(e.g. [56, 180]). At frequencies below $10^{-5}$ Hz (corresponding to binary orbital periods longer than a few days) the intrinsic faintness of WD stars makes DWDs hardly detectable even by the future generation large telescopes [210]. Thus, low-frequency GW observations are crucial for constraining DWD formation models and relevant physical processes involved with mass transfer and the common envelope phases. These systems will also be one of the main contributors to the Galactic foreground in the μ-Hz band [191, 220]. Although the LISA mission is expected to provide tens of thousands of new DWD in

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>
the milli-Hz band (e.g. [160, 169]), µAres will greatly improve our understanding of these systems by leveraging on the individual identification of $O(10^5)$ DWD and on the detailed characterization of the unresolved foreground down to $\lesssim 10^{-5}$ Hz (see Fig. 1).

**Binary systems with WD companions** Among binary systems including a WD companion, WD+MS are expected to be the most numerous. Many systems have been discovered thanks to the bright main sequence (MS) star (e.g. [190]). However, optical telescopes are biased towards binaries with a low-mass WD, in which the MS star does not outshine the WD companion. Thus, being more sensitive towards massive WDs, low frequencies GW observations are the optimal method to study the full mass range of all systems, and will complement the optical surveys. The period and mass distributions of WD+MS binaries provides the most direct link to common-envelope evolution (e.g. [264]). Cataclysmic variables (CVs) are semi-detached close binary systems in which a WD accretes material from a Roche-lobe-filling secondary, typically a MS star (but it can also be a brown dwarf) [277]. These systems represent outstanding laboratories for studying accretion onto COs. Their accretion flows are unaffected by relativistic effects or ultra-strong magnetic fields, making them ideal test systems for our understanding of more complex/compact systems, such as accreting NSs and BHs (e.g. [156]). WD+Helium star systems are less abundant compared to WD + MS stars, nonetheless they can be detected in the optical band out to a few kpc [118]. Recently, one of these systems, CD-30°11223 [117] has been confirmed to be a detectable GW source [166]. WD + Helium star systems represent direct progenitors of DWDs and AM CVn stars because the Helium star is expected to become a WD without going through any more giant stages. Furthermore, these binaries also qualify as double degenerate supernova type Ia progenitors (e.g. [116]). Orbital periods of CD-30°11223-like systems are typically longer than 40 min, thus to fully characterise this population an instrument covering lower GW frequencies is required. In particular, because WD components are significantly less bright when compared to the Helium star companions, measuring the mass of the WDs is practically impossible with optical observations alone. The combination of EM observations with GWs in the $10^{-5} - 10^{-4}$ Hz enabled by µAres represents a unique opportunity for recovering the intrinsic parameters of these systems.

**Galactic double neutron stars (DNSs)** Since the discovery of PSR J1913+16 [139], DNSs have been the prime GW sources (e.g. [200]). The measurement of the change in orbital period of PSR J1913+16 due to GW radiation [260] started a process that recently reached a spectacular highlight. GW170817 was the first confirmed extra-galactic DNS GW source discovered, which has been subsequently followed-up with observations in gammarays, optical/infrared, X-rays, and radio wavelengths [3, 4]. Although only a handful of Galactic DNS can be detected at milli-Hz frequencies, several hundreds of thousands are expected to reside in the µ-Hz band [191, 272]. The promise of µ-Hz GW observations for the study of NS binaries lies mainly in the determination of Galactic DNS merger rates and for establishing the properties of systems that can be related to previous binary evolution stages. However,
if the EM signals of these systems are also detected, studies can be extended to
investigate the details of the parent population and the ages of the mergers, probing
the delay time between the formation of the double NS and the merger. Com-
bined µ-Hz GW and EM observations will produce unprecedented large data sets
and will enable increasingly accurate tests of the massive stellar binary evolution
models.

**Galactic black holes binaries (BHBs)** Current stellar population synthesis models predict that about a million BHBs are likely to be present in the MW [100, 168, 191]. The most massive systems, which stem from lowest metallicity progenitors, will be present in the galactic halo, as they were formed in satellite galaxies that were then accreted by the MW. Several hundreds of these systems are likely to have µ-Hz GW emission [168]. However, given the probable lack of measurable $\dot{f}$ (unless eccentricity is present) properly measuring the chirp mass and identifying these objects may be challenging. These objects are unlikely to be confused with DWDs as those latter have lower SNR due to their low masses, thus occupying a different region of the µAres GW strain-frequency space (see Fig. 1). Confusion with stellar binaries is possible, but EM follow-up will likely be able to distinguish those sources. If sky localisation is good enough, these could be prime candidates for EM follow-up (with facilities like SKA). This will give us an unique view on the formation conditions of these systems (low-metallicity environment, stellar cluster, etc) and accretion onto isolated BHs, which is yet to be found.

**NSs/BHs + stellar companion (possible X-ray binaries)** Tight binaries with a stellar and CO will be observable, particularly for high mass systems, which are the direct progenitors of mergers observed by LIGO/Virgo. To achieve periods < 1 day, these systems must have undergone significant shrinkage of their initial orbit, likely through a common envelope evolution. Some of these systems will display EM emission, and multimessenger detections will allow the distant component masses to be measured (e.g. with SKA). In comparison to EM observations, which often present biases, GW will produce a more complete view of these systems, placing constraints on binary evolution processes based on a population. NS accreting from a companion WD are also expected to be bright X-ray and loud GW sources [259] emitting at sub-milli-Hz frequencies accessible to µAres.

**3.5.2 An unparalleled bird's eye view of SgrA***

What is the nature of the environment surrounding MBHs? Our own Galactic Centre provides a unique insight into this question [119] as it is close enough to allow for the direct observation of individual stars orbiting our MBH SgrA* (the celebrated S-stars [79]) and even direct imaging of the BH itself [142]. This proximity also provides opportunities for GW observations. Theoretical models suggest that the inner 0.04 parsecs surrounding SgrA* should have a 'dark cluster' of compact remnants and faint low-mass stars [10]. Recent work suggests that many of the latter, in the form of brown dwarfs, could be on highly relativistic orbits [12]. Fortuitously, the mass of SgrA* is just right so that if any of these bodies orbit sufficiently close to it they
will emit GWs in the μ-to-milli-Hz band [110, 124]. This will allow us to measure the orbital properties of any faint or dark objects that orbit very close to the MBHs that are invisible or near invisible to other techniques. This will provide invaluable information about the dense stellar cluster near SgrA* (and, by extrapolation, other Milky Way-like galaxies). These observations will also be complementary to efforts in the EM astronomy community which is also seeking to observe faint low-mass stars near SgrA* [93]. Searching for GWs from the Galactic Centre could also allow detection of more exotic objects, such as PBH [124].

Whereas LISA will only be able to observe objects in the very strong field of SgrA*, the low frequency capabilities of the μAres mission greatly increase the ability to detect objects orbiting further out. From Fig. 7 we see that a $1M_{\odot}$ object could be detected with an SNR ~ 10 as far out as 8AU from the black hole with 1 year of observing time. A spectacular example of μAres capabilities, as shown in Fig. 1, is given by the possibility of detecting an inspiralling $10M_{\odot}$ BH onto SgrA* more than 100 Myr before the final plunge. Using a rough EMRI estimate of about $300 \text{ Gyr}^{-1}$ for a MW-like nucleus (see [23], and references therein), this means that μAres might detect $\mathcal{O}(100)$ EMRI progenitors in the Galactic Centre, revolutionizing our understanding of relativistic dynamics in galactic nuclei and dense stellar systems. Perhaps even more intriguing would be the detection of a pulsar orbiting SgrA*. An inspiralling NS can also be seen around SgrA* out to several AU, many Myr before final plunge. If this happens to be an active pulsar detectable with SKA, precise timing will yield exquisite tests of gravity and of the nature of SgrA* [237].

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 7** SNR accumulated over 1 year of observation for a $1M_{\odot}$ object on a circular orbit near SgrA*. For SgrA*, $r_0 = 100M = 4.05$ AU. This plot was made using the SageMath `kerrgeodesic_gw` package in the Black Hole Perturbation Toolkit (http://bhptoolkit.org/)</figcaption></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 1** Arm length variations, line-of-sight velocities and resultant Doppler frequencies for three exemplary orbit radii over a 10 year mission lifetime</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>0.7 AU</th><th>1.0 AU</th><th>1.5 AU</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Average orbit radius</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average arm length</td><td>187 million km</td><td>259 million km</td><td>395 million km</td></tr><tr><td>Total arm length variations<br>(in plane constellation)</td><td>185,000 km</td><td>105,000 km</td><td>492,000 km</td></tr><tr><td>Total arm length variations<br>(out of plane constellation)</td><td>176,000 km</td><td>217,000 km</td><td>65,700 km</td></tr><tr><td>Maximum line-of-sight velocities</td><td>6 m/s</td><td>4 m/s</td><td>12 m/s</td></tr><tr><td>Doppler frequencies at 1064 nm</td><td>5.5 MHz</td><td>4.0 MHz</td><td>11.0 MHz</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Summary of Milky Way science goals:**

- understand common envelope physics via detection of mixed (CO + MS star) binaries and the distribution of DWD at $f < 10^{-4}$ Hz;

- physics of contact and over-contact binaries via joint GW + EM detection;

- characterization of BHB, NSB, and BH-NS population in the Galaxy, synergies with PTAs and SKA;

- unveil the dynamics of stars and COs around SgrA*.

Surprisingly, a GW observatory with the desired low-frequency sensitivity as outlined in Section 2 is feasible with technology realistically available within the next decades. However, such an observatory requires an arm length on the order of 100 million kilometers. The three LISA spacecraft will trail the Earth in an equilateral triangular formation separated by 2.5 million kilometers. The sheer size of the µAres constellation makes similar orbits impossible. The only viable alternative is a constellation with the Sun in its centre as outlined in [25]. Such a formation requires at least three spacecraft (triangular formation) although a higher number is easy to implement. Four spacecraft in a quadrilateral formation would not only increase redundancy but also improve sensitivity by means of orthogonal arms.

**Orbits** For the purpose of this paper, we limit ourselves to a traditional triangular formation. As mentioned in Section 2, two non-coplanar constellations are necessary for source localization. Table 1 shows arm length variations and line-of-sight velocities for three exemplary missions with orbit radii of 0.7 AU (Venus), 1.0 AU (Earth), and 1.5 AU (Mars) obtained from [145]. We chose a 10 year mission lifetime. The first constellation is within the ecliptic plane while the second one is tilted by 90 degrees for optimal source localization.<fnref n="3" />

It is imperative to keep the line-of-sight velocity within reasonable limits as it directly impacts the heterodyne frequency of the interferometric readout. However,

<footnote n="3">³An alternative would be to place a singular triangular constellation with spacecrafts positioned on the heliocentric orbits each having a small inclination to the ecliptic. In this case the orbit will be precessing and it will be possible to achieve a good sky localisation [192].</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_12.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 8** The two µAres constellations (blue and green, 395 million kilometre arm length) alongside a to-scale depiction of LISA (red, 2.5 million kilometre arm length). One µAres constellation is trailing Mars within the ecliptic plane while the other is in an equal orbit 90 degrees tilted with respect to the ecliptic</figcaption></figure>

even for constellations as large as 395 million kilometers, a detailed analysis of the Doppler frequencies using tools described in [32, p. 76] results in a very reasonable heterodyne frequency range of 2 MHz to 12 MHz for all six spacecraft. Since longer arms increase the low-frequency sensitivity of the observatory, we decided to analyze the overall feasibility of these Mars-trailing orbits.<fnref n="4" /> These two µAres constellations are shown in Fig. 8 alongside a to-scale depiction of LISA (2.5 million kilometer arms). Within 10 years the spacecraft will complete 5.3 revolutions around the Sun. Despite the long arms the point-ahead angle stability of ±0.3 µrad is even superior to LISA.

<footnote n="4">⁴We analysed this orbit as a limiting case, however, placing the spacecraft on an Earth orbit will be even easier and it was addressed in [26].</footnote>
**Mission parameters** To match the sensitivity outlined in Fig. 1 the total read-out noise in the interferometric signal must not exceed 50 pm/√Hz with an acceleration noise of 1 × 10⁻¹⁵ ms⁻¹/√Hz. Such values are perfectly realistic:

- The required acceleration noise is only two times lower than what has already been shown during the 2016 LISA Pathfinder mission [20].

- The read-out noise level can be achieved with a received laser power on the order of 15 pW which results in a shotnoise limit of 35 pm. This leaves room for spurious influences from laser relative intensity noise (estimated at 5 × 10⁻⁸ at 2 MHz) and electronic noise of the photodetector (estimated at 1 pA/√Hz and 1 pV/√Hz) given a local oscillator laser power of ≈ 0.2 mW. [33]

All these parameters are very similar to the LISA requirements. However, in order to receive 15 pW of laser power at the far spacecraft over a distance of 430 million kilometers, a significant increase in laser power and telescope diameter is necessary. One possible combination would be a 1 meter telescope diameter paired with 10 watts of laser output power. This could be made possible by

- a relaxed dimensional stability requirement of the opto-mechanical architecture (from 1 (LISA) to 10 pm/√Hz) due to the higher read-out noise limit compared to LISA, and

- a relaxed phase fidelity requirement for the laser amplifier [267] (from 0.6 (LISA) to 6 µrad/√Hz) due to the lower maximum heterodyne frequency which results in an increase in tolerable timing jitter. This requirement is given with respect to 2.4 GHz clock-tone sidebands for the inter-spacecraft frequency distribution as described in [134].

Additionally, while an inter-spacecraft frequency distribution might still be necessary, the relaxed timing noise requirements may lead to the omission of a pilot-tone correction scheme for the analog to digital converters of the phasemeter. Power requirements for the increased laser power could be satisfied by either installing larger solar panels which in contrast to LISA can face the Sun directly, or alternatively a radioisotope power systems.

**Feasibility** The outlined µAres mission concept would be less complex in many ways due to more stable orbits that could make some of the required subsystems in LISA obsolete (e.g. point-ahead angle mechanism, pilot tone correction). Furthermore, all dimensional and timing stability requirements are relaxed due to the lower maximum heterodyne frequency and a higher read-out noise level. This means that most other hardware developed for LISA will meet the µAres requirements with a margin. However, we identified a number of challenges that would require further research:

- Acceleration noise: LISA Pathfinder did measurements down to Fourier frequencies of 2 × 10⁻⁵. It is not yet obvious that a slightly improved acceleration noise compared to LISA Pathfinder can be achieved over the entire µ-Hz range.

- Laser power: 10 watt laser fiber amplifiers are commercially available. It needs to be demonstrated that such amplifiers can meet the relaxed phase fidelity requirement at full output power.
- Laser power stability: LISA has a relative stability requirement of $1 \times 10^{-8}$ at 5 MHz. This noise increases towards lower frequencies and it needs to be shown that $5 \times 10^{-8}$ can be achieved at 2 MHz.

- Orbit insertion: Upcoming launch vehicles like “New Glenn” by *Blue Origin* (7 meter fairing) or “Space Launch System” by NASA (8.4 meter fairing) are certainly large and powerful enough for the outlined µAres spacecraft. The planned “Starship” by *SpaceX* (9 meter fairing) should even be capable of transporting all spacecraft directly to a heliocentric Mars orbit. However, the delta-v required for 90 degree out of ecliptic plane orbit insertion could be extremely challenging.

- Ranging: The µAres constellation requires knowledge about the absolute spacecraft distance of < 10 meters. Depending on the Deep Space Network positioning accuracy, the on-board ranging algorithm might need to be improved.

The overall concept benefits greatly from LISA technology heritage and upcoming cheap and powerful heavy-lift orbital launch vehicles. The compelling scientific benefits of the µAres mission concept demand a more detailed feasibility study which should include a more detailed look at the benefits and drawbacks of different orbits. Even only a single µAres-like constellation within the ecliptic plane will allow us to observe the very rich landscape of µ-Hz gravitational wave sources in great detail.

**Summary of strawman mission concept:**

- two equilateral triangle constellations with an arm length of 430 million km;

- heterodyne frequency range: 2 MHz to 12 MHz (line-of-sight velocity < 10 m/s);

- 1 meter telescope diameter, 10 watts laser output power: 35 pm read-out noise limit;

- acceleration noise: $1 \times 10^{-15} \text{ms}^{-1}/\sqrt{\text{Hz}}$ down to $1 \times 10^{-7} \text{Hz}$.

## 4 Conclusions

In response to the ESA Voyage 2050 call, we presented a concept study for a space-based GW interferometer covering the milli-Hz to µ-Hz frequency band. We demonstrated that an instrument operating in this window will add invaluable insights into a number of key unsolved issues in astrophysics cosmology and fundamental physics. Up to thousands of MBHBs will be caught early in their adiabatic inspiral, hundreds of years before merger, offering a unique sample for studying the evolution of MBHs in the universe, the emergence of high redshift quasars, and the elusive MBHs at the low end of the mass function, lurking at the center of dwarf galaxies. Detection of persistent sources in their inspiral phase, likely occurring in gas rich environments, will enable identification of EM counterparts, which will make possible to disentangle the MBHB population still hiding in plain sight among the lightcurves of hundreds of millions of quasars. Hundreds of standard candles will probe the geometry of the Universe out to the early epoch of structure formation and strong lensing of several sources might enable host localization of MBHBs mergin at $z \approx 10$. The MW will be surveyed well beyond LISA capabilities, which will allow,
among other things, to directly study the physics of contact binaries and common envelope physics and the relativistic dynamics around SgrA*. Finally, the µ-Hz will open up a vast region of the allowed parameter space of QCD, EM and first order phase transitions.

We showed that the required sensitivity can be achieved by an Heliocentric detector consisting of two triangular constellations tilted with respect to each other. We specified the design for a Martian orbit (µ-Ares, 1.5 AU radius), but similar performances can be obtained either with an Earth (1 AU radius) or Venusian (0.7 AU radius) orbits. We found that, surprisingly, the target sensitivity is feasible with technology realistically available within the next decades, greatly benefitting from LISA technology heritage.

By the 2040s, the µ-Hz to milli-Hz frequency band will be the widest gap in the GW sky coverage provided by ground and space based instruments, including the Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer, LISA, Pulsar Timing Arrays and possibly either the TianQin [173] or Taiji [219] space interferometers. µ-Ares, or a comparable instrument, bring the promise of filling this gap, to complete the exploration of the gravitational universe, a prospect that deserves consideration and a much more in-depth feasibility study.

**Funding** Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Milano - Bicocca within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.

**Open Access** This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

## References

1. Abada, A., et al.: FCC-hh: the hadron collider. Eur Phys J ST 228(4), 755-1107 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2019-900087-0

2. Abazajian, K.N., Adshead, P., Ahmed, Z., Allen, S.W., Alonso, D., Arnold, K.S., Baccigalupi, C., Bartlett, J.G., Battaglia, N., Benson, B.A., Bischoff, C.A., Borrill, J., Buza, V., Calabrese, E., Caldwell, R., Carlstrom, J.E., Chang, C.L., Crawford, T.M., Cyr-Racine, F.Y., De Bernardis, F., de Haan, T., di Serego Alighieri, S., Dunkley, J., Dvorkin, C., Errard, J., Fabbian, G., Feeney, S., Ferraro, S., Filippini, J.P., Flauger, R., Fuller, G.M., Gluscevic, V., Green, D., Grin, D., Grohs, E., Henning, J.W., Hill, J.C., Hlozek, R., Holder, G., Holzapfel, W., Hu, W., Huffenberger, K.M., Keskitalo, R., Knox, L., Kosowsky, A., Kovac, J., Kovetz, E.D., Kuo, C.L., Kusaka, A., Le, J.eune.M., Lee, A.T., Lilley, M., Loverde, M., Madhavacheril, M.S., Mantz, A., Marsh, D.J.E., McMahon, J., Meerburg, P.D., Meyers, J., Miller, A.D., Munoz, J.B., Nguyen, H.N., Niemack, M.D., Peloso, M., Peloton, J., Pogosian, L., Pryke, C., Raveri, M., Reichardt, C.L., Rocha, G., Rotti, A., Schaan, E., Schmittfull, M.M., Scott, D., Sehgal, N., Shandera, S., Sherwin, B.D., Smith, T.L., Sorbo, L., Starkman, G.D., Story, K.T., van, E.ngelen.A., Vieira, J.D., Watson, S., Whitehorn, N., Kimmy Wu, W.L.: CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition. arXiv:1610.02743 (2016)

3. Abbott, B.P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.D., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., Adams, T., Addesso, P., Adhikari, R.X., Adya, V.B., et al.: GW170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary
neutron star inspiral. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (16), 161101 (2017a). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 119.161101, arXiv:1710.05832

4. Abbott, B.P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.D., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., Adams, T., Addesso, P., Adhikari, R.X., Adya, V.B., et al.: Multi-messenger observations of a binary neutron star merger. ApJL 848 (2), L12 (2017b). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9, arXiv:1710.05833

5. Abbott, B.P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.D., Abraham, S., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., Adhikari, R.X., Adya, V.B., L.I.G.O. Scientific Collaboration, 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 (3), 031040 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.9.031040, arXiv:1811.12907

6. Abbott, B.P., et al.: Binary black hole mergers in the first advanced LIGO observing run. Phys. Rev. X6(4), 041,015 (2016a). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041015, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.8.039903, [erratum: Phys. Rev.X8, no 3, 039903(2018)], arXiv:1606.04856

7. Abbott, B.P., et al: Tests of general relativity with GW150914. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (22), 221,101 (2016b). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.221101, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.129902, [Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett.121, no 12, 129902(2018)], arXiv:1602.03841

8. Abbott, B.P., et al.: A gravitational-wave standard siren measurement of the Hubble constant. Nature 551 (7678), 85–88 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24471, arXiv:1710.05835

9. Aguirre, J., et al.: The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts. JCAP 1902, 056 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056, arXiv:1808.07445

10. Alexander, T.: Stellar dynamics and stellar phenomena near a massive black hole. ARA&A 55(1), 17–57 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055306, arXiv:1701.04762

11. Ali-Haïmoud, Y., Kamionkowski, M.: Cosmic microwave background limits on accreting primordial black holes. Phys. Rev. D 95 (4), 043534 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.043534, arXiv:1612.05644

12. Amaro-Seoane, P.: Extremely large mass-ratio inspirals. Phys. Rev. D99 (12), 123,025 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.123025, arXiv:1903.10871

13. Amaro-Seoane, P., Sesana, A., Hoffman, L., Benacquista, M., Eichhorn, C., Makino, J., Spurzem, R.: Triplets of supermassive black holes: astrophysics, gravitational waves and detection. MNRAS 402 (4), 2308–2320 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16104.x, arXiv:0910.1587

14. Amaro-Seoane, P., Aoudia, S., Babak, S., Binétruy, P., Berti, E., Bohé, A., Caprini, C., Colpi, M., Cornish, N.J., Danzmann, K., Dufaux, J.F., Gair, J., Jennrich, O., Jetzer, P., Klein, A., Lang, R.N., Lobo, A., Littenberg, T., McWilliams, S.T., Nelemans, G., Petiteau, A., Porter, E.K., Schutz, B.F., Sesana, A., Stebbins, R., Sumner, T., Vallisneri, M., Vitale, S., Volonteri, M., Ward, H.: Low-frequency gravitational-wave science with eLISA/NGO. Class. Quantum Gravity 29 (12), 124016 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/29/12/124016, arXiv:1202.0839

15. Amaro-Seoane, P., Audley, H., Babak, S., Baker, J., Barausse, E., Bender, P., Berti, E., Binetruy, P., Born, M., Bortoluzzi, D., Camp, J., Caprini, C., Cardoso, V., Colpi, M., Conklin, J., Cornish, N., Cutler, C., Danzmann, K., Dolesi, R., Ferraioli, L., Ferroni, V., Fitzsimons, E., Gair, J., Gesa, B.ote.L., Giardini, D., Gibert, F., Grimani, C., Halloin, H., Heinzel, G., Hertog, T., Hewitson, M., Holley-Bockelmann, K., Hollington, D., Mueller, M., Inchauspe, H., Jetzer, P., Karnesis, N., Killow, C., Klein, A., Klipstein, B., Korsakova, N., Larson, S.L., Livas, J., Lloro, I., Man, N., Mance, D., Martino, J., Mateos, I., McKenzie, K., McWilliams, S.T., Miller, C., Mueller, G., Nardini, G., Nelemans, G., Nofrarias, M., Petiteau, A., Pivato, P., Plagnol, E., Porter, E., Reiche, J., Robertson, D., Robertson, N., Rossi, E., Russano, G., Schutz, B., Sesana, A., Shoemaker, D., Slutsky, J., Sopuerta, C.F., Sumner, T., Tamanini, N., Thorpe, I., Troebs, M., Vallisneri, M., Vecchio, A., Vetrugno, D., Vitale, S., Volonteri, M., Wanner, G., Ward, H., Wass, P., Weber, W., Ziemer, J., Zweifel, P.: Laser Interferometer Space Antenna:Xiv:1702.00786 (2017)

16. Arca-Sedda, M., Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R.: The MEGaN project II. Gravitational waves from intermediate-mass and binary black holes around a supermassive black hole. MNRAS 483, 152–171 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty3096, arXiv:1709.05567

17. Arca-Sedda, M., Gualandris, A.: Gravitational wave sources from inspiralling globular clusters in the Galactic Centre and similar environments. MNRAS 477, 4423–4442 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty922, arXiv:1804.06116
18. Arca Sedda, M., Askar, A., Giersz, M.: MOCCA-SURVEY Database I. Intermediate mass black holes in Milky Way globular clusters and their connection to supermassive black holes. arXiv:1905.00902 (2019a)

19. Arca Sedda, M., Berry, C.P.L., Jani, K., Amaro-Seoane, P., Auclair, P., Baird, J., Baker, T., Berti, E., Breivik, K., Burrows, A., Caprini, C., Chen, X., Doneva, D., Ezquiaga, J.M., Ford, K.E.S., Katz, M.L., Kolkowitz, S., McKernan, B., Mueller, G., Nardini, G., Pikovski, I., Rajendran, S., Sesana, A., Shao, L., Tamanini, N., Vartanyan, D., Warburton, N., Witek, H., Wong, K., Zevin, M.: The Missing Link in Gravitational-Wave Astronomy: Discoveries waiting in the decihertz range. arXiv:1908.11375 (2019b)

20. Armano, M., Audley, H., Baird, J., Binetruy, P., Born, M., Bortoluzzi, D., Castelli, E., Cavalleri, A., Cesarini, A., Cruise, A.M., Danzmann, K., de Deus Silva, M., Diepholz, I., Dixon, G., Dolesi, R., Ferraioli, L., Ferroni, V., Fitzsimons, E.D., Freschi, M., Gesa, L., Gibert, F., Giardini, D., Giusteri, R., Grimani, C., Grzymisch, J., Harrison, I., Heinzel, G., Hewitson, M., Hollington, D., Hoyland, D., Hueller, M., Inchauspé, H., Jennrich, O., Jetzer, P., Karnesis, N., Kaune, B., Korsakova, N., Killow, C.J., Lobo, J.A., Lloro, I., Liu, L., López-Zaragoza, J.P., Maarschalkerweerd, R., Mance, D., Meshksar, N., Martín, V., Martin-Polo, L., Martino, J., Martin-Porqueras, F., Mateos, I., McNamara, P.W., Mendes, J., Mendes, L., Nofrarias, M., Paczkowski, S., Perreur-Lloyd, M., Petiteau, A., Pivato, P., Plagnol, E., Ramos-Castro, J., Reiche, J., Robertson, D.I., Rivas, F., Russano, G., Slutsky, J., Sopuerta, C.F., Sumner, T., Texier, D., Thorpe, J.I., Vetrugno, D., Vitale, S., Wanner, G., Ward, H., Wass, P.J., Weber, W.J., Wissel, L., Wittchen, A., Zweifel, P.: Beyond the required lisa free-fall performance: New lisa pathfinder results down to 20 µHz. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 061,101 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.061101

21. Armitage, P.J., Natarajan, P.: Accretion during the merger of supermassive black holes. ApJL 567(1), L9–L12 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1086/339770, arXiv:astro-ph/0201318

22. Bañados, E., Venemans, B.P., Mazzucchelli, C., Farina, E.P., Walter, F., Wang, F., Decarli, R., Stern, D., Fan, X., Davies, F.B., Hennawi, J.F., Simcoe, R.A., Turner, M.L., Rix, H.W., Yang, J., Kelson, D.D., Rudie, G.C., Winters, J.M.: An 800-million-solar-mass black hole in a significantly neutral Universe at a redshift of 7.5. Nature 553(7689), 473–476 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25180, arXiv:1712.01860

23. Babak, S., Gair, J., Sesana, A., Barausse, E., Sopuerta, C.F., Berry, C.P.L., Berti, E., Amaro-Seoane, P., Petiteau, A., Klein, A.: Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. V. Extreme mass-ratio inspirals. Phys. Rev. D 95(10), 103012 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.103012, arXiv:1703.09722

24. Baibhav, V., Berti, E.: Multimode black hole spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. D 99(2), 024005 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.024005, arXiv:1809.03500

25. Baker, J., Barke, S.F., Bender, P.L., Berti, E., Caldwell, R., Conklin, J.W., Cornish, N., Ferrara, E.C., Holley-Bockelmann, K., Kamai, B., Larson, S.L., Livas, J., McWilliams, S.T., Mueller, G., Natarajan, P., Rioux, N., Sankar, S.R., Schnittman, J., Shoemaker, D., Slutsky, J., Stebbins, R., Thorpe, I., Ziemer, J.: Space based gravitational wave astronomy beyond lisa. arXiv:arXiv:1907.11305 (2019a)

26. Baker, J., Barke, S.F., Bender, P.L., Berti, E., Caldwell, R., Conklin, J.W., Cornish, N., Ferrara, E.C., Holley-Bockelmann, K., Kamai, B., Larson, S.L., Livas, J., McWilliams, S.T., Mueller, G., Natarajan, P., Rioux, N., Sankar, S.R., Schnittman, J., Shoemaker, D., Slutsky, J., Stebbins, R., Thorpe, I., Ziemer J: Space based gravitational wave astronomy beyond lisa. arXiv:1907.11305 (2019b)

27. Barausse, E., Yagi, K.: Gravitation-wave emission in shift-symmetric horndeski theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115(21), 211105 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.211105, arXiv:1509.04539

28. Barausse, E., Palenzuela, C., Ponce, M., Lehner, L.: Neutron-star mergers in scalar-tensor theories of gravity. Phys. Rev. D 87, 081,506 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.87.081506

29. Barausse, E., Cardoso, V., Pani, P.: Can environmental effects spoil precision gravitational-wave astrophysics? Phys. Rev. D 89(10), 104059 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.104059, arXiv:1404.7149

30. Barausse, E., Yunes, N., Chamberlain, K.: Theory-agnostic constraints on black-hole dipole radiation with multiband gravitational-wave astrophysics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116(24), 241104 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.241104, arXiv:1603.04075

31. Barkana, R., Loeb, A.: In the beginning: the first sources of light and the reionization of the universe. Phys. Rep. 349(2), 125–238 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-1573(01)00019-9, arXiv:astro-ph/0010468
32. Barke, S.: Inter-spacecraft frequency distribution for future gravitational wave observatories. http://simonbarke.com/download/Simon_Barke-PhD_Thesis_2015-vorgelegt.pdf (2015)

33. Barke, S., Wang, Y., Delgado, J.J.E., Tröbs, M., Heinzel, G., Danzmann, K.: Towards a gravitational wave observatory designer: sensitivity limits of spaceborne detectors. Class. Quantum Gravity 32(9), 095,004 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/32/9/095004

34. Bartolo, N., Caprini, C., Domcke, V., Figueroa, D.G., Garcia-Bellido, J., Chiara Guzzetti, M., Liguori, M., Matarrese, S., Peloso, M., Petiteau, A., Ricciardone, A., Sakellariadou, M., Sorbo, L., Tasinato, G.: Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. IV: probing inflation with gravitational waves. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2016(12), 026 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/12/026, arXiv:1610.06481

35. Bartolo, N., et al.: Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. IV: Probing inflation with gravitational waves. JCAP 1612(12), 026 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/12/026, arXiv:1610.06481

36. Bauswein, A., Friedrich Bastian, N.U., Blaschke, D., Chatziioannou, K., Clark, J.A., Fischer, T., Janka, H.T., Just, O., Oertel, M., Stergioulas, N.: Equation-of-state Constraints and the QCD Phase Transition in the Era of Gravitational-Wave Astronomy. AIP Conf Proc 2127(1) 020, 013 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5117803, arXiv:1904.01306

37. Bean, R., Magueijo, J.: Could supermassive black holes be quintessential primordial black holes? Phys. Rev. D 66(6), 063505 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.66.063505, arXiv:astro-ph/0204486

38. Begelman, M.C.: Can a spherically accreting black hole radiate very near the Eddington limit. MNRAS 187, 237–251 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/187.2.237

39. Begelman, M.C., Blandford, R.D., Rees, M.J.: Massive black hole binaries in active galactic nuclei. Nature 287(5780), 307–309 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1038/287307a0

40. Belgacem, E., Calcagni, G., Crisostomi, M., Dalang, C., Dirian, Y., María Ezquiaga, J., Fasiello, M., Foffa, S., Ganz, A., García-Bellido, J., Lombriser, L., Maggiore, M., Tamanini, N., Tasinato, G., Zumalacárregui, M., Barausse, E., Bartolo, N., Bertacca, D., Klein, A., Matarrese, S., Sakellariadou, M.: Testing modified gravity at cosmological distances with LISA standard sirens. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2019(7), 024 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2019/07/024, arXiv:1906.01593

41. Bellovary, J., Volonteri, M., Governato, F., Shen, S., Quinn, T., Wadsley, J.: The first massive black hole seeds and their hosts. ApJ 742(1), 13 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/742/1/13, arXiv:1104.3858

42. Bernon, J., Bian, L., Jiang, Y.: A new insight into the phase transition in the early Universe with two Higgs doublets. JHEP 05, 151 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2018)151, arXiv:1712.08430

43. Berti, E., Buonanno, A., Will, C.M.: Estimating spinning binary parameters and testing alternative theories of gravity with LISA. Phys. Rev. D 71(8), 084025 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.71.084025, arXiv:gr-qc/0411129

44. Berti, E., Barausse, E., Cardoso, V., Gualtieri, L., Pani, P., Sperhake, U., Stein, L.C., Wex, N., Yagi, K., Baker, T., Burgess, C.P., Coelho, F.S., Doneva, D., De Felice, A., Ferreira, P.G., Freire, P.C.C., Healy, J., Herdeiro, C., Horbatsch, M., Kleihaus, B., Klein, A., Kokkotas, K., Kunz, J., Laguna, P., Lang, R.N., Li, T.G.F., Littenberg, T., Matas, A., Mirshekari, S., Okawa, H., Radu, E., O'Shaughnessy, R., Sathyaprakash, B.S., Van Den Broeck, C., Winther, H.A., Witek, H., Emad Aghili, M., Alsing, J., Bolen, B., Bombelli, L., Caudill, S., Chen, L., Degollado, J.C., Fujita, R., Gao, C., Gerosa, D., Kamali, S., Silva, H.O., Rosa, J.G., Sadeghian, L., Sampaio, M., Sotani, H., Zilhao, M.: Testing general relativity with present and future astrophysical observations. Class. Quantum Gravity 32(24), 243001 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/32/24/243001, arXiv:1501.07274

45. Blanchet, L., Damour, T.: Hereditary effects in gravitational radiation. Phys. Rev. D 46(10), 4304–4319 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.46.4304

46. Blanchet, L., Spallicci, A., Whiting, B. (eds.): Mass and Motion in General Relativity, Fundamental Theories of Physics, vol. 162. Springer, Berlin (2011)

47. Bode, T., Haas, R., Bogdanović, T., Laguna, P., Shoemaker, D.: Relativistic mergers of supermassive black holes and their electromagnetic signatures. ApJ 715(2), 1117–1131 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/715/2/1117, arXiv:0912.0087

48. Bonetti, M., Haardt, F., Sesana, A., Barausse, E.: Post-Newtonian evolution of massive black hole triplets in galactic nuclei - II. Survey of the parameter space. MNRAS 477(3), 3910–3926 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty896, arXiv:1709.06088
49. Bonetti, M., Sesana, A., Haardt, F., Barausse, E., Colpi, M.: Post-Newtonian evolution of massive black hole triplets in galactic nuclei - IV. Implications for LISA. MNRAS 486(3), 4044–4060 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz903, arXiv:1812.01011

50. Bowen, D.B., Campanelli, M., Krolik, J.H., Mewes, V., Noble, S.C.: Relativistic dynamics and mass exchange in binary black hole mini-disks. ApJ 838(1), 42 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa63f3, arXiv:1612.02373

51. Bowman, J.D., Rogers, A.E.E., Monsalve, R.A., Mozdzen, T.J., Mahesh, N.: An absorption profile centred at 78 megahertz in the sky-averaged spectrum. Nature 555, 67–70 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25792, arXiv:1810.05912

52. Boyarsky, A., Ruchayskiy, O., Shaposhnikov, M.: The Role of sterile neutrinos in cosmology and astrophysics. Ann Rev Nucl Part Sci 59, 191–214 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nucl.010909.083654, arXiv:0901.0011

53. Braginskii, V.B., Grishchuk, L.P.: Kinematic resonance and the memory effect in free mass gravitational antennas. Zhurnal Eksperimentalnoi i Teoreticheskoi Fiziki 89, 744–750 (1985)

54. Bramberger, S.F., Brandenberger, R.H., Jreidini, P., Quintin, J.: Cosmic string loops as the seeds of super-massive black holes. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2015(6), 007 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2015/06/007, arXiv:1503.02317

55. Breivik, K., Rodriguez, C.L., Larson, S.L., Kalogera, V., Rasio, F.A.: Distinguishing between formation channels for binary black holes with LISA. ApJL 830(1), L18 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8205/830/1/L18, arXiv:1606.09558

56. Brown, W.R., Gianninas, A., Kilic, M., Kenyon, S.J., Allende Prieto, C.: The ELM survey. VII. Orbital properties of low-mass white dwarf binaries. ApJ 818(2), 155 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/155, arXiv:1604.04268

57. Bruggisser, S., Von Harling, B., Matsedonskyi, O., Servant, G.: Baryon asymmetry from a composite Higgs Boson. Phys Rev Lett 121(13), 131,801 (2018a). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.131801, arXiv:1803.08546

58. Bruggisser, S., Von Harling, B., Matsedonskyi, O., Servant, G.: Electroweak phase transition and baryogenesis in composite Higgs models. JHEP 12, 099 (2018b). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2018)099, arXiv:1804.07314

59. Cai, R.G., Tamanini, N., Yang, T.: Reconstructing the dark sector interaction with LISA. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2017(5), 031 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2017/05/031, arXiv:1703.07323

60. Callegari, S., Mayer, L., Kazantzidis, S., Colpi, M., Governato, F., Quinn, T., Wadsley, J.: Pairing of supermassive black holes in unequal-mass galaxy mergers. ApJL 696(1), L89–L92 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/L89, arXiv:0811.0615

61. Capelo, P.R., Volonteri, M., Dotti, M., Bellovary, J.M., Mayer, L., Governato, F.: Growth and activity of black holes in galaxy mergers with varying mass ratios. MNRAS 447(3), 2123–2143 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu2500, arXiv:1409.0004

62. Capozziello, S., Khodadi, M., Lambiase, G.: The quark chemical potential of QCD phase transition and the stochastic background of gravitational waves. Phys. Lett. B789, 626–633 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.01.004, arXiv:1808.06188

63. Caprini, C., Figueroa, D.G.: Cosmological backgrounds of gravitational waves. Class. Quantum Gravity 163(16), 001 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aac608, arXiv:1801.04268

64. Caprini, C., Tamanini, N.: Constraining early and interacting dark energy with gravitational wave standard sirens: the potential of the eLISA mission. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2016(10), 006 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/10/006, arXiv:1607.08755

65. Caprini, C., Durrer, R., Servant, G.: The stochastic gravitational wave background from turbulence and magnetic fields generated by a first-order phase transition. JCAP 0912, 024 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2009/12/024, arXiv:0909.0622

66. Caprini, C., Durrer, R., Siemens, X.: Detection of gravitational waves from the QCD phase transition with pulsar timing arrays. Phys Rev D82 063, 511 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.82.063511, arXiv:1007.1218

67. Caprini, C., Figueroa, D.G., Flauger, R., Nardini, G., Peloso, M., Pieroni, M., Ricciardone, A., Tasi-nato, G.: Reconstructing the spectral shape of a stochastic gravitational wave background with LISA. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2019(11), 017 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2019/11/017, arXiv:1906.09244
68. Caprini, C., et al.: Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA. II: Gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions. JCAP **1604**(04), 001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/04/001, arXiv:1512.06239

69. Carr, B., Silk, J.: Primordial black holes as generators of cosmic structures. MNRAS **478**(3), 3756–3775 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1204, arXiv:1801.00672

70. Carr, B., Clesse, S., Garcia-Bellido, J., Kuhnel, F.: Cosmic conundra explained by thermal history and primordial black holes. arXiv:1906.08217 (2019)

71. Cerioli, A., Lodato, G., Price, D.J.: Gas squeezing during the merger of a supermassive black hole binary. MNRAS **457**(1), 939–948 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw034, arXiv:1601.03776

72. Chala, M., Nardini, G., Sobolev, I.: Unified explanation for dark matter and electroweak baryogenesis with direct detection and gravitational wave signatures. Phys Rev **D94**(5), 055,006 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.055006, arXiv:1605.08663

73. Chala, M., Ramos, M., Spannowsky, M.: Gravitational wave and collider probes of a triplet Higgs sector with a low cutoff. Eur Phys J C **79**(2), 156 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6655-1, arXiv:1812.01901

74. Chamberlain, K., Yunes, N.: Theoretical physics implications of gravitational wave observation with future detectors. Phys. Rev. D **96**(8), 084039 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.084039, arXiv:1704.08268

75. Chandrasekhar, S.: Dynamical friction. I. General considerations: the coefficient of dynamical friction. ApJ **97**, 255 (1943). https://doi.org/10.1086/144517, arXiv:1704.08268

76. Chang, P., Strubbe, L.E., Menou, K., Quataert, E.: Fossil gas and the electromagnetic precursor of supermassive binary black hole mergers. MNRAS **407**(3), 2007–2016 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17056.x, arXiv:0906.0825

77. Chen, S., Middleton, H., Sesana, A., Del Pozzo, W., Vecchio, A.: Probing the assembly history and dynamical evolution of massive black hole binaries with pulsar timing arrays. MNRAS **468**(1), 404–417 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx475, arXiv:1612.02826

78. Christodoulou, D.: Nonlinear nature of gravitation and gravitational-wave experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett. **67**, 1486–1489 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.67.1486

79. Chu, D.S., et al: Investigating the binarity of S0-2: Implications for its origins and robustness as a probe of the laws of gravity around a supermassive black hole. Astrophys J **854**(1), 12 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/, https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aaa3eb, https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aad734, [Erratum: Astrophys. J.863.no.1,111(2018)], arXiv:1709.04890

80. Clesse, S., Garcia-Bellido, J.: Massive primordial black holes from hybrid inflation as dark matter and the seeds of galaxies. Phys. Rev. D **92**(2), 023,524 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.023524, arXiv:1501.07565

81. Compère, G.: Infinite towers of supertranslation and superrotation memories. Phys. Rev. Lett. **123**(2), 021101 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.021101, arXiv:1904.00280

82. Cook, J.L., Sorbo, L.: Particle production during inflation and gravitational waves detectable by ground-based interferometers. Phys. Rev. D **85**, 023,534 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.86.069901, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.85.023534, [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D86,069901(2012)], arXiv:1109.0022

83. Corrales, L.R., Haiman, Z., MacFadyen, A.: Hydrodynamical response of a circumbinary gas disc to black hole recoil and mass loss. MNRAS **404**(2), 947–962 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16324.x, arXiv:0910.0014

84. Csikor, F., Fodor, Z., Heitger, J.: Endpoint of the hot electroweak phase transition. Phys Rev Lett **82**, 21–24 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.21, arXiv:hep-ph/9809291

85. Cuadra, J., Armitage, P.J., Alexander, R.D., Begelman, M.C.: Massive black hole binary mergers within subparsec scale gas discs. MNRAS **393**(4), 1423–1432 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14147.x, arXiv:0809.0311

86. Damour, T., Esposito-Farese, G.: Nonperturbative strong-field effects in tensor-scalar theories of gravitation. Phys. Rev. Letters **70**(15), 2220–2223 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2220

87. de Rham, C., Melville, S.: Gravitational rainbows: LIGO and dark energy at its cutoff. Phys. Rev. Lett. **121**(22), 221101 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.221101, arXiv:1806.09417

88. de Rham, C., Deskins, J.T., Tolley, A.J., Zhou, S.Y.: Graviton mass bounds. Rev. Modern Phys. **89**(2), 025,004 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.89.025004, arXiv:1606.08462
89. Deffayet, C., Menou, K.: Probing Gravity with Spacetime Sirens. ApJL **668**(2), L143–L146 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1086/522931, arXiv:0709.0003

90. Del Pozzo, W., Sesana, A., Klein, A.: Stellar binary black holes in the LISA band: a new class of standard sirens. MNRAS **475**(3), 3485–3492 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty057, arXiv:1703.01300

91. Derdzinski, A.M., D'Orazio, D., Duffell, P., Haiman, Z., MacFadyen, A.: Probing gas disc physics with LISA: simulations of an intermediate mass ratio inspiral in an accretion disc. MNRAS **486**(2), 2754–2765 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz1026, arXiv:1810.03623

92. Dewdney, P.E., Hall, P.J., Schilizzi, R.T., Lazio, T.J.L.W.: The square kilometre array. IEEE Proc. **97**(8), 1482–1496 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2009.2021005, arXiv:1903.05293

93. Do, T., Ghez, A., Becklin, E., Genzel, R., Psaltis, D., Perets, H., Armitage, P., Gammie, C., Quataert, E., Hosek, M., Gautam, A.K., Bentley, R.O., Morris, M.R., Lu, J., O'Neil, K.K., Chen, Z., Hees, A., Ciurlo, A., Rich, R.M., Kerzendorf, W., Dehghanfar, A., Naoz, S., Beaton, R.L., Bellini, A., Greene, J., Chakrabarti, S., Chu, D.S., Libralato, M., Witzel, G., Nishiyama, S., Rasio, F., Weinberg, N.N., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Ozel, F., Hora, J., Smith, H.: Envisioning the next decade of Galactic Center science: a laboratory for the study of the physics and astrophysics of supermassive black holes. In: Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, vol. 51, p. 530 (2019)

94. Doneva, D.D., Yazadjiev, S.S.: New gauss-bonnet black holes with curvature-induced scalarization in extended scalar-tensor theories. Phys Rev Lett **120**, 131,103 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.131103

95. Dorsch, G.C., Huber, S.J., Konstandin, T., No, J.M.: A second Higgs doublet in the early universe: Baryogenesis and gravitational waves. JCAP **1705**(05), 052 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2017/05/052, arXiv:1611.05874

96. Dotti, M., Sesana, A., Decarli, R.: Massive black hole binaries: dynamical evolution and observational signatures. Adv. Astron. **940568**, 2012 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/940568, arXiv:1111.0664

97. Dubois, Y., Volonteri, M., Silk, J.: Black hole evolution - III. Statistical properties of mass growth and spin evolution using large-scale hydrodynamical cosmological simulations. MNRAS **440**(2), 1590–1606 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu373, arXiv:1304.4583

98. Durrer, R.: The cosmic microwave background. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511817205

99. Ebisuzaki, T., Makino, J., Tsuru, T.G., Funato, Y., Portegies Zwart, S., Hut, P., McMillan, S., Matsushita, S., Matsumoto, H., Kawabe, R.: Missing link found? the “Runaway” path to supermassive black holes. ApJL **562**, L19–L22 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1086/338118, arXiv:astro-ph/0106252

100. Elbert, O.D., Bullock, J.S., Kaplinghat, M.: Counting black holes: The cosmic stellar remnant population and implications for LIGO. MNRAS **473**(1), 1186–1194 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx1959, arXiv:1703.02551

101. Ezquiaga, J.M.: Dark energy in light of multi-messenger gravitational-wave astronomy. Front. Astron. Space Sci. **5**, 44 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fsps.2018.00044

102. Fan, X., Strauss, M.A., Becker, R.H., White, R.L., Gunn, J.E., Knapp, G.R., Richards, G.T., Schneider, D.P., Brinkmann, J., Fukugita, M.: Constraining the evolution of the ionizing background and the epoch of Reionization with z 6 Quasars. II. A sample of 19 Quasars. AJ **132**, 117–136 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1086/504836, arXiv:astro-ph/0512082

103. Fang, Z., Wu, Y.L., Zhang, L.: Chiral phase transition and QCD phase diagram from AdS/QCD. Phys Rev D **99**(3), 034,028 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.034028, arXiv:1810.12525

104. Favata, M.: Post-Newtonian corrections to the gravitational-wave memory for quasicircular, inspiralling compact binaries. Phys. Rev. D **80**(2), 024002 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.80.024002, arXiv:0812.0069

105. Fiacconi, D., Mayer, L., Roškar, R., Colpi, M.: Massive black hole pairs in clumpy, self-gravitating circumnuclear disks: stochastic orbital decay. ApJL **777**(1), L14 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/2041-8205/777/1/L14, arXiv:1307.0822

106. Figueroa, D.G., Megias, E., Nardini, G., Pieroni, M., Quiros, M., Ricciardone, A., Tasinato, G.: LISA as a probe for particle physics: electroweak scale tests in synergy with ground-based experiments. PoS GRASS2018, 036 (2018). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.325.0036, arXiv:1806.06463

107. Fishbach, M., et al.: A standard siren measurement of the hubble constant from GW170817 without the electromagnetic counterpart. Astrophys. J. **871**(1), L13 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aaf96e, arXiv:1807.05667
108. Fowler, W.A.: The stability of supermassive stars. ApJ **144**, 180 (1966). https://doi.org/10.1086/148594

109. Freese, K., Rindler-Daller, T., Spolyar, D., Valluri, M.: Dark stars: a review. Rep. Prog. Phys. **79**(6), 066902 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/79/6/066902, arXiv:1501.02394

110. Freitag, M.: Gravitational waves from stars orbiting the massive black hole at the galactic center. Astrophys J **583**, L21–L24 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1086/367813, arXiv:astro-ph/0211209

111. Fujii, K., Grojean, C., Peskin, M.E., Barklow, T., Gao, Y., Kanemura, S., Kim, H., List, J., Nojiri, M., Perelstein, M., Poeschl, R., Reuter, J., Simon, F., Tanabe, T., Wells, J.D., Yu, J., Berggren, M., Habermehl, M., Jung, S., Karl, R., Ogawa, T., Tian, J., Brau, J., Murayama, H.: Physics case for the 250 GeV stage of the international linear collider, arXiv:1710.07621 (2017)

112. Garcia-Bellido, J., Nesseris, S.: Gravitational wave energy emission and detection rates of Primordial Black Hole hyperbolic encounters. Phys. Dark Univ. **21**, 61–69 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dark.2018.06.001, arXiv:1711.09702

113. Garcia-Bellido, J., Linde, A.D., Wands, D.: Density perturbations and black hole formation in hybrid inflation. Phys. Rev. D **54**, 6040–6058 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.54.6040, arXiv:astro-ph/9605094

114. Gardner, J.P., Mather, J.C., Clampin, M., Doyon, R., Greenhouse, M.A., Hammel, H.B., Hutchings, J.B., Jakobsen, P., Lilly, S.J., Long, K.S., Lunine, J.I., McCaughrean, M.J., Mountain, M., Nella, J., Rieke, G.H., Rieke, M.J., Rix, H.W., Smith, E.P., Sonneborn, G., Stiavelli, M., Stockman, H.S., Windhorst, R.A., Wright, G.S.: The James Webb space telescope. Space Sci. Rev. **123**(4), 485–606 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-006-8315-7, arXiv:astro-ph/0606175

115. Gaskin, J.A., Allured, R., Bandler, S.R., Basso, S., Bautz, M.W., Baysinger, M.F., Biskach, M.P., Boswell, T.M., Capizzo, P.D., Chan, K.W., Civitani, M.M., Cohen, L.M., Cotroneo, V., Davis, J.M., DeRoo, C.T., DiPirro, M.J., Dominguez, A., Fabisinski, L.L., Falcone, A.D., Figueroa-Feliciano, E., Garcia, J.C., Gelmis, K.E., Heilmann, R.K., Hopkins, R.C., Jackson, T., Kilaru, K., Kraft, R.P., Liu, T., McClelland, R.S., McCentaffer, R.L., McCarley, K.S., Mulqueen, J.A., Özel, F., Pareschi, G., Reid, P.B., Riveros, R.E., Rodriguez, M.A., Rowe, J.W., Saha, T.T., Schattenburg, M.L., Schnell, A.R., Schwartz, D.A., Solly, P.M., Suggs, R.M., Sutherlin, S.G., Swartz, D.A., Trolier-McKinstry, S., Tutt, J.H., Vikhlinin, A., Walker, J., Yoon, W., Zhang, W.W.: Lynx Mission concept status. In: Proc. of the SPIE, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, vol. 10397, p. 103970S (2017). https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2273911

116. Geier, S., Nesslinger, S., Heber, U., Przybilla, N., Napiwotzki, R., Kudritzki, R.P.: The subdwarf B+ white dwarf binary KPD 1930+2752, a supernova type ia progenitor candidate. In: Napiwotzki, R., Burleigh, M.R. (eds.) 15th European Workshop on White Dwarfs, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, vol. 372, p. 393 (2007). arXiv:astro-ph/0612532

117. Geier, S., Marsh, T.R., Wang, B., Dunlap, B., Barlow, B.N., Schaffenroth, V., Chen, X., Irrgang, A., Maxted, P.F.L., Ziegerer, E., Kupfer, T., Miszalski, B., Heber, U., Han, Z., Shporer, A., Telt-ing, J.H., Gänsicke, B.T., Østensen, R.H., O’Toole, S.J., Napiwotzki, R.: A progenitor binary and an ejected mass donor remnant of faint type Ia supernovae. A & A **554**, A54 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201321395, arXiv:1304.4452

118. Geier, S., Raddi, R., Gentile Fusillo, N.P., Marsh, T.R.: The population of hot subdwarf stars stud-ied with Gaia. II. The Gaia DR2 catalogue of hot subluminous stars. A & A **621**, A38 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201834236, arXiv:1810.09321

119. Genzel, R., Eisenhauer, F., Gillessen, S.: The Galactic Center massive black hole and nuclear star cluster. Rev. Mod. Phys. **82**(4), 3121–3195 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.82.3121, arXiv:1006.0064

120. Giersz, M., Leigh, N., Hypki, A., Lützgendorf, N., Askar, A.: MOCCA code for star cluster simula-tions - IV. A new scenario for intermediate mass black hole formation in globular clusters. MNRAS **454**, 3150–3165 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv2162, arXiv:1506.05234

121. Gilmozzi, R., Spyromilio, J.: The european extremely large telescope (E-ELT). Messenger **127**, 11 (2007)

122. Gogoberidze, G., Kahniashvili, T., Kosowsky, A.: The spectrum of gravitational radiation from pri-mordial turbulence. Phys Rev D **76**, 083, 002 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.76.083002, arXiv:0705.1733

123. Gondolo, P., Silk, J.: Dark matter annihilation at the galactic center. Phys. Rev. Lett. **83**(9), 1719–1722 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.1719, arXiv:astro-ph/9906391
124. Gourgoulhon, E., Le Tiec, A., Vincent, F.H., Warburton, N.: Gravitational waves from bodies orbiting the Galactic Center black hole and their detectability by LISA. Astron Astrophys **627**, A92 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201935406, arXiv:1903.02049

125. Greene, J.E.: Low-mass black holes as the remnants of primordial black hole formation. Nat. Commun. **3**, 1304 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2314, arXiv:1211.7082

126. Habouzit, M., Volonteri, M., Dubois, Y.: Blossoms from black hole seeds: properties and early growth regulated by supernova feedback. MNRAS **468**(4), 3935–3948 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx666, arXiv:1605.09394

127. Haemmerlé, L., Woods, T.E., Klessen, R.S., Heger, A., Whalen, D.J.: The evolution of supermassive Population III stars. MNRAS **474**(2), 2757–2773 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx2919, arXiv:1705.09301

128. Haiman, Z.: Constraints from gravitational recoil on the growth of supermassive black holes at high redshift. ApJ **613**(1), 36–40 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1086/422910, arXiv:astro-ph/0404196

129. Haiman, Z.: Electromagnetic chirp of a compact binary black hole: A phase template for the gravitational wave inspiral. Phys. Rev. D **96**(2), 023004 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.023004, arXiv:1705.06765

130. Haiman, Z., Brandt, W.N., Vikhlinin, A., Bellovary, J., Gallo, E., Greene, J., Inayoshi, K., Lazio, J., Lehmer, B., Luo, B., Madau, P., Natarajan, P., Ozel, F., Pacucci, F., Sesana, A., Stern, D., Vignali, C., Visbal, E., Vito, F., Volonteri, M., Wrobel, J.: Electromagnetic window into the dawn of black holes. In: Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Bull. Am. Astron. Soc., vol. 51, p. 557 (2019). arXiv:1903.08579

131. Hanany, S., Alvarez, M., Artis, E., Ashton, P., Aumont, J., Aurlien, R., Banerji, R., Barreiro, R.B., Bartlett, J.G., Basak, S., Battaglia, N., Bock, J., Boddy, K.K., Bonato, M., Borrill, J., Bouchet, F., Boulanger, F., Burkhart, B., Chluba, J., Chuss, D., Clark, S.E., Cooperrider, J., Crill, B.P., De Zotti, G., Delabrouille, J., Di Valentino, E., Didier, J., Doré, O., Eriksen, H.K., Errard, J., Essinger-Hileman, T., Feeney, S., Filippini, J., Fissel, L., Flauger, R., Fuskeland, U., Gluscevic, V., Gorski, K.M., Green, D., Hensley, B., Herranz, D., Hill, J.C., Hivon, E., Hložek, R., Hubmayr, J., Johnson, B.R., Jones, W., Jones, T., Knox, L., Kogut, A., López-Caniego, M., Lawrence, C., Lazarian, A., Li, Z., Madhavacheril, M., Melin, J.B., Meyers, J., Murray, C., Negrello, M., Novak, G., O'Brient, R., Paine, C., Pearson, T., Pogosian, L., Pryke, C., Puglisi, G., Remazeilles, M., Rocha, G., Schmittfull, M., Scott, D., Shirron, P., Stephens, I., Sutin, B., Tomasi, M., Trangsrud, A., van, E.ngelen.A., Vansyngel, F., Wehus, I.K., Wen, Q., Xu, S., Young, K., Zonca, A.: PICO: Probe of Inflation and Cosmic Origins. arXiv:1902.10541 (2019)

132. Hawking, S.W., Perry, M.J., Strominger, A.: Soft Hair on Black Holes. Phys. Rev. Lett. **116**(23), 231301 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.231301, arXiv:1601.00921

133. Hazumi, M., et al.: LiteBIRD: a satellite for the studies of b-mode polarization and inflation from cosmic background radiation detection. J. Low. Temp. Phys. **194**(5-6), 443–452 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10909-019-02150-5

134. Heinzel, G., Esteban, J.J., Barke, S., Otto, M., Wang, Y., Garcia, A.F., Danzmann, K.: Auxiliary functions of theLISA laser link: ranging, clock noise transfer and data communication. Class. Quantum Gravity **28**(9), 094,008 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/28/9/094008, arXiv:1601.00921

135. Hindmarsh, M., Huber, S.J., Rummukainen, K., Weir, D.J.: Gravitational waves from the sound of a first order phase transition. Phys Rev Lett **112**, 041301 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.041301, arXiv:1304.2433

136. Hindmarsh, M., Huber, S.J., Rummukainen, K., Weir, D.J.: Numerical simulations of acoustically generated gravitational waves at a first order phase transition. Phys Rev D92(12), 123,009 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.123009, arXiv:1504.03291

137. Hosokawa, T., Omukai, K., Yorke, H.W.: Rapidly accreting supergiant protostars: embryos of supermassive black holes? ApJ **756**(1), 93 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/756/1/93, arXiv:1203.2613

138. Hosokawa, T., Yorke, H.W., Inayoshi, K., Omukai, K., Yoshida, N.: Formation of primordial supermassive stars by rapid mass accretion. ApJ **778**(2), 178 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/778/2/178, arXiv:1308.4457

139. Hulse, R.A., Taylor, J.H.: Discovery of a pulsar in a binary system. ApJL **195**, L51–L53 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1086/181708

140. Inayoshi, K., Haiman, Z., Ostriker, J.P.: Hyper-Eddington accretion flows on to massive black holes. MNRAS **459**(4), 3738–3755 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw836, arXiv:1511.02116
141. Islo, K., Simon, J., Burke-Spolaor, S., Siemens, X.: Prospects for memory detection with low-frequency gravitational wave detectors. arXiv:1906.11936 (2019)

142. Issaoun, S., et al.: The size, shape, and scattering of sagittarius A* at 86 GHz: First VLBI with ALMA. Astrophys J 871(1), 30 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aaf732, arXiv:1901.06226

143. Ivanova, N., Justham, S., Chen, X., De Marco, O., Fryer, C.L., Gaburov, E., Ge, H., Glebbeek, E., Han, Z., Li, X.D., Lu, G., Marsh, T., Podsiadlowski, P., Potter, A., Soker, N., Taam, R., Tauris, T.M., van den Heuvel, E.P.J., Webbink, R.F.: Common envelope evolution: where we stand and how we can move forward. A&A Rev. 21, 59 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2, arXiv:1209.4302

144. Janssen, G., Hobbs, G., McLaughlin, M., Bassa, C., Deller, A., Kramer, M., Lee, K., Mingarelli, C., Rosado, P., Sanidas, S., Sesana, A., Shao, L., Stairs, I., Stappers, B., Verbiest, J.P.W.: Gravitational wave astronomy with the SKA. In: Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), p. 3 (2015). arXiv:1501.00127

145. Jennrich, O.: Private Communication (2019)

146. Kajantie, K., Laine, M., Rummukainen, K., Shaposhnikov, M.E.: The Electroweak phase transition: a nonperturbative analysis. Nucl Phys B466, 189-258 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(96)00052-1, arXiv:hep-lat/9510020

147. Kakizaki, M., Kanemura, S., Matsui, T.: Gravitational waves as a probe of extended scalar sectors with the first order electroweak phase transition. Phys Rev D92(11), 115,007 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.115007, arXiv:1509.08394

148. Kamionkowski, M., Kosowsky, A., Turner, M.S.: Gravitational radiation from first order phase transitions. Phys Rev D49, 2837-2851 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.49.2837, arXiv:astro-ph/9310044

149. Kelly, B.J., Baker, J.G., Etienne, Z.B., Giacomazzo, B., Schnittman, J.: Prompt electromagnetic transients from binary black hole mergers. Phys. Rev. D 96(12), 123003 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.123003, arXiv:1710.02132

150. Khan, F.M., Just, A., Merritt, D.: Efficient merger of binary supermassive black holes in merging galaxies. ApJ 732(2), 89 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/732/2/89, arXiv:1103.0272

151. Khan, F.M., Berczik, P., Just, A.: Gravitational wave driven mergers and coalescence time of supermassive black holes. A & A 615, A71 (2018a). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201730489, arXiv:1803.11394

152. Khan, F.M., Capelo, P.R., Mayer, L., Berczik, P.: Dynamical evolution and merger timescales of LISA massive black hole binaries in disk galaxy mergers. ApJ 868(2), 97 (2018b). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aae77b, arXiv:1807.11004

153. Kibble, T.W.B.: Topology of cosmic domains and strings. J. Phy. A Math. Gen. 9(8), 1387-1398 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/9/8/029. http://stacks.iop.org/0305-4470/9/i=8/a=029?key=crossref.fd6da1d908a3bf72b56557edd8d38c37

154. Klein, A., Cornish, N., Yunes, N.: Fast frequency-domain waveforms for spin-precessing binary inspirals. Phys. Rev. D 90(12), 124029 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.124029, arXiv:1408.5158

155. Klein, A., Barausse, E., Sesana, A., Petiteau, A., Berti, E., Babak, S., Gair, J., Aoudia, S., Hinder, I., Ohme, F., Wardell, B.: Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA: Supermassive black hole binaries. Phys. Rev. D 93(2), 024003 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.024003, arXiv:1511.05581

156. Knigge, C.: Cataclysmic variables: eight breakthroughs in eight years. In: Kalogera, V., van der Sluys, M. (eds.) American Institute of Physics Conference Series, American Institute of Physics Conference Series, vol. 1314, pp. 171-180 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3536361

157. Kocsis, B., Haiman, Z., Menou, K.: Premerger localization of gravitational wave standard sirens with lisa: triggered search for an electromagnetic counterpart. ApJ 684(2), 870-887 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1086/590230, arXiv:0712.1144

158. Kocsis, B., Yunes, N., Loeb, A.: Observable signatures of extreme mass-ratio inspiral black hole binaries embedded in thin accretion disks. Phys. Rev. D 84(2), 024032 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.84.024032, arXiv:1104.2322

159. Kormendy, J., Ho, L.C.: Coevolution (or not) of supermassive black holes and host galaxies. ARA&A 51(1), 511-563 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811, arXiv:1304.7762
160. Korol, V., Rossi, E.M., Groot, P.J., Nelemans, G., Toonen, S., Brown, A.G.A.: Prospects for detection of detached double white dwarf binaries with Gaia, LSST and LISA. MNRAS 470(2), 1894–1910 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx1285, arXiv:1703.02555

161. Korol, V., Koop, O., Rossi, E.M.: Detectability of double white dwarfs in the local group with LISA. ApJL 866(2), L20 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aae587, arXiv:1808.05959

162. Korol, V., Rossi, E.M., Barausse, E.: A multimessenger study of the Milky Way's stellar disc and bulge with LISA, Gaia, and LSST. MNRAS 483(4), 5518–5533 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty3440, arXiv:1806.03306

163. Kosowsky, A., Turner, M.S.: Gravitational radiation from colliding vacuum bubbles: envelope approximation to many bubble collisions. Phys. Rev. D47, 4372–4391 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.47.4372, arXiv:astro-ph/9211004

164. Kozaczuk, J.: Bubble expansion and the viability of singlet-driven electroweak baryogenesis. JHEP 10, 135 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2015)135, arXiv:1506.04741

165. Kulier, A., Ostriker, J.P., Natarajan, P., Lackner, C.N., Cen, R.: Understanding black hole mass assembly via accretion and mergers at late times in cosmological simulations. ApJ 799(2), 178 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/799/2/178, arXiv:1307.3684

166. Kupfer, T., Korol, V., Shah, S., Nelemans, G., Marsh, T.R., Ramsay, G., Groot, P.J., Steeghs, D.T.H., Rossi, E.M.: LISA verification binaries with updated distances from Gaia Data Release 2. MNRAS 480(1), 302–309 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1545, arXiv:1805.00482

167. Kyutoku, K., Seto, N.: Gravitational-wave cosmography with LISA and the Hubble tension. Phys Rev D95(8), 083,525 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.083525, arXiv:1609.07142

168. Lamberts, A., Garrison-Kimmel, S., Hopkins, P.F., Quataert, E., Bullock, J.S., Faucher-Giguère, C.A., Wetzel, A., Kereš, D., Drango, K., Sanderson, R.E.: Predicting the binary black hole population of the Milky Way with cosmological simulations. MNRAS 480(2), 2704–2718 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty2035, arXiv:1801.03099

169. Lamberts, A., Blunt, S., Littenberg, T.B., Garrison-Kimmel, S., Kupfer, T., Sanderson, R.E.: Predicting the LISA white dwarf binary population in the Milky Way with cosmological simulations. MNRAS 490(4), 5888–5903 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz2834, arXiv:1907.00014

170. Li, M.W., Yang, Y., Yuan, P.H.: Imprints of early universe on gravitational waves from first-order phase transition in QCD. arXiv:1812.09676 (2018)

171. Lippai, Z., Frei, Z., Haiman, Z.: Prompt shocks in the gas disk around a recoiling supermassive black hole binary. ApJL 676(1), L5 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1086/587034, arXiv:0801.0739

172. Littenberg, T.B., Yunes, N.: Binary white dwarfs as laboratories for extreme gravity with LISA. Class Quant Grav 36(9), 095,017 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/ab0a3d, arXiv:1811.01093

173. Luo, J., Chen, L.S., Duan, H.Z., Gong, Y.G., Hu, S., Ji, J., Liu, Q., Mei, J., Milyukov, V., Sazhin, M., Shao, C.G., Toth, V.T., Tu, H.B., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Yeh, H.C., Zhan, M.S., Zhang, Y., Zharov, V., Zhou, Z.B.: TianQin: a space-borne gravitational wave detector. Class Quantum Gravity 33(3), 035010 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/33/3/035010, arXiv:1512.02076

174. Lupi, A., Haardt, F., Dotti, M., Colpi, M.: Massive black hole and gas dynamics in mergers of galaxy nuclei - II. Black hole sinking in star-forming nuclear discs. MNRAS 453(4), 3437–3446 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv1920, arXiv:1509.02920

175. Lupi, A., Haardt, F., Dotti, M., Fiacconi, D., Mayer, L., Madau, P.: Growing massive black holes through supercritical accretion of stellar-mass seeds. MNRAS 456(3), 2993–3003 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv2877, arXiv:1512.02651

176. Lyne, A.G., Lorimer, D.R.: High birth velocities of radio pulsars. Nature 369(6476), 127–129 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1038/369127a0

177. MacLeod, C.L., Hogan, C.J.: Precision of Hubble constant derived using black hole binary absolute distances and statistical redshift information. Phys. Rev. D 77(4), 043512 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.77.043512, arXiv:0712.0618

178. Madau, P., Rees, M.J.: Massive black holes as population III remnants. ApJL 551(1), L27–L30 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1086/319848, arXiv:astro-ph/0101223

179. Malbon, R.K., Baugh, C.M., Frenk, C.S., Lacey, C.G.: Black hole growth in hierarchical galaxy formation. MNRAS 382(4), 1394–1414 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12317.x, arXiv:astro-ph/0607424

180. Maoz, D., Hallakoun, N.: The binary fraction, separation distribution, and merger rate of white dwarfs from SPY. MNRAS 467(2), 1414–1425 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx102, arXiv:1609.02156
181. Mastrobuono-Battisti, A., Perets, H.B., Loeb, A.: Effects of intermediate mass black holes on nuclear star clusters. ApJ **796**, 40 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/796/1/40, arXiv:1403.3094

182. Max, K., Platscher, M., Smirnov, J.: Gravitational wave oscillations in bigavity. Phys. Rev. Lett. **119**(11), 111101 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.111101, arXiv:1703.07785

183. Mayer, L., Fiacconi, D., Bonoli, S., Quinn, T., Roškar, R., Shen, S., Wadsley, J.: Direct formation of supermassive black holes in metal-enriched gas at the heart of high-redshift galaxy mergers. ApJ **810**(1), 51 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/51, arXiv:1411.5683

184. Megías, E., Nardini, G., Quirós, M.: Cosmological phase transitions in warped space: gravitational waves and collider signatures. JHEP **09**, 095 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2018)095, arXiv:1806.04877

185. Mezcua, M., Civano, F., Marchesi, S., Suh, H., Fabbiano, G., Volonteri, M.: Intermediate-mass black holes in dwarf galaxies out to redshift 2.4 in the Chandra COSMOS-Legacy Survey. MNRAS **478**(2), 2576–2591 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1163, arXiv:1802.01567

186. Moody, M.S.L., Shi, J.M., Stone, J.M.: Hydrodynamic torques in circumbinary accretion disks. ApJ **875**(1), 66 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ab09ee, arXiv:1903.00008

187. Mortlock, D.J., Warren, S.J., Venemans, B.P., Patel, M., Hewett, P.C., McMahon, R.G., Simpson, C., Theuns, T., Gonzáles-Solares, E.A., Adamson, A., Dye, S., Hambly, N.C., Hirst, P., Irwin, M.J., Kuiper, E., Lawrence, A., Röttgering, H.J.A.: A luminous quasar at a redshift of $z = 7,085$. Nature **474**, 616–619 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10159, arXiv:1106.6088

188. Muñoz, D.J., Miranda, R., Lai, D.: Hydrodynamics of circumbinary accretion: angular momentum transfer and binary orbital evolution. ApJ **871**(1), 84 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aaf867, arXiv:1810.04676

189. Nandra, K., Barret, D., Barcons, X., Fabian, A., den Herder, J.W., Piro, L., Watson, M., Adami, C., Aird, J., Afonso, J.M., Alexander, D., Argiroffi, C., Amati, L., Arnaud, M., Atteia, J.L., Audard, M., Badenes, C., Ballet, J., Ballo, L., Bamba, A., Bhardwaj, A., Stefano, B.attistelli.E., Becker, W., De, B.ecker.M., Behar, E., Bianchi, S., Biffi, V., Bîrzan, L., Bocchino, F., Bogdanov, S., Birin, L., Boller, T., Borgani, S., Borm, K., Bouché, N., Bourdin, H., Bower, R., Braito, V., Branchini, E., Branduardi-Raymont, G., Bregman, J., Brenneman, L., Brightman, M., Brüggen, M., Buchner, J., Bulbul, E., Brusa, M., Bursa, M., Caccianiga, A., Cackett, E., Campana, S., Cappelluti, N., Cappi, M., Carrera, F., Ceballos, M., Christensen, F., Chu, Y.H., Churazov, E., Clerc, N., Corbel, S., Corral, A., Comastri, A., Costantini, E., Croston, J., Dadina, M., D'Ai, A., Decourchelle, A., Della, C.eca.R., Dennerl, K., Dolag, K., Done, C., Dovciak, M., Drake, J., Eckert, D., Edge, A., Ettori, S., Ezoe, Y., Feigelson, E., Fender, R., Feruglio, C., Finoguenov, A., Fiore, F., Galeazzi, M., Gallagher, S., Gandhi, P., Gaspari, M., Gastaldello, F., Georgakakis, A., Georgantopoulos, I., Gilfanov, M., Gitti, M., Gladstone, R., Goosmann, R., Gosset, E., Grosso, N., Guedel, M., Guerrero, M., Haberl, F., Hardcastle, M., Heinz, S., Alonso, H.erringo.A., Hervé, A., Holmstrom, M., Iwasawa, K., Jonker, P., Kaastra, J., Kara, E., Karas, V., Kastner, J., King, A., Kosenko, D., Koutroumpa, D., Kraft, R., Kreykenbohm, I., Lallement, R., Lanzuisi, G., Lee, J., Lemoine-Goumard, M., Lobban, A., Lodato, G., Lovisari, L., Lotti, S., McCharthy, I., McNamara, B., Maggio, A., Maiolino, R., De Marco, B., de Martino, D., Mateos, S., Matt, G., Maughan, B., Mazzotta, P., Mendez, M., Merloni, A., Micela, G., Miceli, M., Mignani, R., Miller, J., Miniutti, G., Molendi, S., Montez, R., Moretti, A., Motch, C., Nazé, Y., Nevalainen, J., Nicastro, F., Nulsen, P., Ohashi, T., O'Brien, P., Osborne, J., Oskinova, L., Pacaud, F., Paerels, F., Page, M., Papadakis, I., Pareschi, G., Petre, R., Petrucci, P.O., Piconcelli, E., Pillitteri, I., Pinto, C., de Plaa, J., Pointecouteau, E., Ponman, T., Ponti, G., Porquet, D., Pounds, K., Pratt, G., Predehl, P., Proga, D., Psaltis, D., Rafferty, D., Ramos-Ceja, M., Ranalli, P., Rasia, E., Rau, A., Rauw, G., Rea, N., Read, A., Reeves, J., Reiprich, T., Renaud, M., Reynolds, C., Risaliti, G., Rodriguez, J., Rodriguez, H.idalgo.P., Roncarelli, M., Rosario, D., Rossetti, M., Rozanska, A., Rovilos, E., Salvaterra, R., Salvato, M., Di Salvo, T., Sanders, J., Sanz-Forcada, J., Schawinski, K., Schaye, J., Schwope, A., Sciortino, S., Severgnini, P., Shankar, F., Sijacki, D., Sim, S., Schmid, C., Smith, R., Steiner, A., Stelzer, B., Stewart, G., Strohmayer, T., Strüder, L., Sun, M., Takei, Y., Tatischeff, V., Tiengo, A., Tombesi, F., Trinchieri, G., Tsuru, T.G., Ud-Doula, A., Ursino, E., Valencic, L., Vanzella, E., Vaughan, S., Vignali, C., Vink, J., Vito, F., Volonteri, M., Wang, D., Webb, N., Willingale, R., Wilms, J., Wise, M., Worrall, D., Young, A., Zampieri, L., In't Zand, J., Zane, S., Zezas, A., Zhang, Y., Zhuravleva, I.: The hot and energetic universe: a white paper presenting the science theme motivating the Athena+ mission. arXiv:1306.2307 (2013)

190. Nebot Gómez-Morán, A., Gänsicke, B.T., Schreiber, M.R., Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Schwope, A.D., Southworth, J., Aungwerojwit, A., Bothe, M., Davis, P.J., Kolb, U., Müller, M., Papadaki, C., Pyrzas,
S., Rabitz, A., Rodríguez-Gil, P., Schmidtobreick, L., Schwarz, R., Tappert, C., Toloza, O., Vogel, J., Zorotovic, M.: Post common envelope binaries from SDSS. XII. The orbital period distribution. A & A **536**, A43 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201117514, arXiv:1109.6662

191. Nelemans, G., Yungelson, L.R., Portegies Zwart, S.F.: The gravitational wave signal from the Galactic disk population of binaries containing two compact objects. A & A **375**, 890–898 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20010683, arXiv:astro-ph/0105221

192. Ni, W.T. (ed.): One Hundred years of General Relativity, 12: Gravitational wave detection in space (2017)

193. Nishizawa, A., Berti, E., Klein, A., Sesana, A.: eLISA eccentricity measurements as tracers of binary black hole formation. Phys. Rev. D **94**(6), 064020 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.064020

194. Nishizawa, A., Sesana, A., Berti, E., Klein, A.: Constraining stellar binary black hole formation scenarios with eLISA eccentricity measurements. MNRAS **465**(4), 4375–4380 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw2993, arXiv:1606.09295

195. Pacucci, F., Ferrara, A.: Simulating the growth of Intermediate Mass Black Holes. MNRAS **448**, 104–118 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv018, arXiv:1501.00989

196. Pacucci, F., Baldassare, V., Cappelluti, N., Fan, X., Ferrara, A., Haiman, Z., Natarajan, P., Ozel, F., Schneider, R., Tremblay, G.R., Urry, M.C., Valiante, R., Vikhlinin, A., Volonteri, M.: Detecting the birth of supermassive black holes formed from heavy seeds. In: Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Bull. Am. Astron. Soc., vol. 51, p. 117 (2019). arXiv:1903.07623

197. Palenzuela, C., Barausse, E., Ponce, M., Lehner, L.: Dynamical scalarization of neutron stars in scalar-tensor gravity theories. Phys. Rev. D **89**(4), 044024 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.044024, arXiv:1310.4481

198. Petiteau, A., Babak, S., Sesana, A.: Constraining the dark energy equation of state using LISA observations of spinning massive black hole binaries. Astrophys. J. **732**(2), 82 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/732/2/82, arXiv:1102.0769

199. Pfister, H., Lupi, A., Capelo, P.R., Volonteri, M., Bellovary, J.M., Dotti, M.: The birth of a supermassive black hole binary. MNRAS **471**(3), 3646–3656 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx1853, arXiv:1706.04010

200. Phinney, E.S.: The rate of neutron star binary mergers in the universe: minimal predictions for gravity wave detectors. ApJL **380**, L17 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1086/186163

201. Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., Ashdown, M., Aumont, J., Baccigalupi, C., Ballarini, M., Banday, A.J., Barreiro, R.B., Bartolo, N., Basak, S., Battye, R., Benabed, K., Bernard, J.P., Bersanelli, M., Bielewicz, P., Bock, J.J., Bond, J.R., Borrill, J., Bouchet, F.R., Boulanger, F., Bucher, M., Burigana, C., Butler, R.C., Calabrese, E., Cardoso, J.F., Carron, J., Challinor, A., Chiang, H.C., Chluba, J., Colombo, L.P.L., Combet, C., Contreras, D., Crill, B.P., Cuttaia, F., de Bernardis, P., de Zotti, G., Delabrouille, J., Delouis, J.M., Di, V. Valentino, E., Diego, J.M., Doré, O., Douspis, M., Ducout, A., Dupac, X., Dusini, S., Efstathiou, G., Elsner, F., Enßlin, T.A., Eriksen, H.K., Fantaye, Y., Farhang, M., Fergusson, J., Fernandez-Cobos, R., Finelli, F., Forastieri, F., Frailis, M., Franceschi, E., Frolov, A., Galeotta, S., Galli, S., Ganga, K., Génova-Santos, R.T., Gerbino, M., Ghosh, T., González-Nuevo, J., Górski, K.M., Gratton, S., Gruppuso, A., Gudmundsson, J.E., Hamann, J., Hand, Ley.W., Herranz, D., Hivon, E., Huang, Z., Jaffe, A.H., Jones, W.C., Karakci, A., Keihänen, E., Keskitalo, R., Kiiveri, K., Kim, J., Kisner, T.S., Knox, L., Krachmalnicoff, N., Kunz, M., Kurkisuonio, H., Lagache, G., Lamarre, J.M., Lasenby, A., Lattanzi, M., Lawrence, C.R., Le, J. eune.M., Lemos, P., Lesgourgues, J., Levrier, F., Lewis, A., Liguori, M., Lilje, P.B., Lilley, M., Lindholm, V., López-Caniego, M., Lubin, P.M., Ma, Y.Z., Macías-Pérez, J.F., Maggio, G., Maino, D., Mandolesi, N., Mangilli, A., Marcos-Caballero, A., Maris, M., Martin, P.G., Martinelli, M., Martínez-González, E., Matarrese, S., Mauri, N., McEwen, J.D., Meinhold, P.R., Melchiorri, A., Mennella, A., Migliaccio, M., Millea, M., Mitra, S., Miville-Deschênes, M.A., Molinari, D., Montier, L., Morgante, G., Moss, A., Natoli, P., Nørgaard-Nielsen, H.U., Pagano, L., Paoletti, D., Partridge, B., Patanchon, G., Peiris, H.V., Perrotta, F., Pettorino, V., Piacentini, F., Polastri, L., Polenta, G., Puget, J.L., Rachen, J.P., Reinecke, M., Remazeilles, M., Renzi, A., Rocha, G., Rosset, C., Roudier, G., Rubiño-Martín, J.A., Ruiz-Granados, B., Salvati, L., Sandri, M., Savelainen, M., Scott, D., Shellard, E.P.S., Sirignano, C., Sirri, G., Spencer, L.D., Sunyaev, R., Suur-Uski, A.S., Tauber, J.A., Tavagnacco, D., Tenti, M., Toffolatti, L., Tomasi, M., Trombetti, T., Valenziano, L., Valiviita, J., Van, T.ent.B., Vibert, L., Vielva, P., Villa, F., Vittorio, N., Wandelt, B.D., Wehus, I.K., White, M., White, S.D.M., Zacchei, A., Zonca, A.: Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. arXiv:1807.06209 (2018)
202. Zwart Portegies, S.F., Baumgardt, H., McMillan, S.L.W., Makino, J., Hut, P., Ebisuzaki, T.: The ecology of star clusters and intermediate-mass black holes in the galactic bulge. ApJ **641**, 319–326 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1086/500361, arXiv:astro-ph/0511397

203. Postnov, K.A., Yungelson, L.R.: The evolution of compact binary star systems. Living Rev. Relativ. **17**(1), 3 (2014). https://doi.org/10.12942/lrr-2014-3, arXiv:1403.4754

204. Poulin, V., Serpico, P.D., Calore, F., Clesse, S., Kohri, K.: CMB bounds on disk-accreting massive primordial black holes. Phys. Rev. D **96**(8), 083524 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.083524, arXiv:1707.04206

205. Preto, M., Berentzen, I., Berczik, P., Spurzem, R.: Fast coalescence of massive black hole binaries from mergers of galactic nuclei: implications for low-frequency gravitational-wave astrophysics. ApJL **732**(2), L26 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/2041-8205/732/2/L26, arXiv:1102.4855

206. Punturo, M., Abernathy, M., Acernese, F., Allen, B., Andersson, N., Arun, K., Barone, F., Barr, B., Barsuglia, M., Beker, M., Beveridge, N., Birindelli, S., Bose, S., Bosi, L., Braccini, S., Bradaschia, C., Bulik, T., Calloni, E., Cella, G., Chassande Mottin, E., Chelkowski, S., Chincarini, A., Clark, J., Coccia, E., Colacino, C., Colas, J., Cumming, A., Cunningham, L., Cuoco, E., Danilishin, S., Danzmann, K., De Luca, G., De Salvo, R., Dent, T., De Rosa, R., Di Fiore, L., Di Virgilio, A., Doets, M., Fafone, V., Falferi, P., Flaminio, R., Franc, J., Frasconi, F., Freise, A., Fulda, P., Gair, J., Gemme, G., Gennai, A., Giazotto, A., Glampedakis, K., Granata, M., Grote, H., Guidi, G., Hammond, G., Hannam, M., Harms, J., Heinert, D., Hendry, M., Heng, I., Hennes, E., Hild, S., Hough, J., Husa, S., Huttner, S., Jones, G., Khalili, F., Kokeyama, K., Kokkotas, K., Krishnan, B., Lorenzini, M., Lück, H., Majorana, E., Mandel, I., Mandic, V., Martin, I., Michel, C., Minenkov, Y., Morgado, N., Mosca, S., Mours, B., Müller Ebhardt, H., Murray, P., Nawrodt, R., Nelson, J., Oshaughnessy, R., Ott, C.D., Palomba, C., Paoli, A., Parguez, G., Pasqualetti, A., Passaquieti, R., Passuello, D., Pinard, L., Poggiani, R., Popolizio, P., Prato, M., Puppo, P., Rabeling, D., Rapagnani, P., Read, J., Regimbau, T., Rehbein, H., Reid, S., Rezzolla, L., Ricci, F., Richard, F., Rocchi, A., Rowan, S., Rüdiger, A., Sassolas, B., Sathyaprakash, B., Schnabel, R., Schwarz, C., Seidel, P., Sintes, A., Somiya, K., Speiris, F., Strain, K., Strigin, S., Sutton, P., Tarabrin, S., Thüring, A., van den Brand, J., van Leewen, C., van Veggel, M., van den Broeck, C., Vecchio, A., Veitch, J., Vetrano, F., Vicere, A., Vyatchanin, S., Willke, B., Woan, G., Wolfango, P., Yamamoto, K.: The Einstein Telescope: a third-generation gravitational wave observatory. Class. Quantum Gravity **27**(19), 194002 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/27/19/194002

207. Randall, L., Xianyu, Z.Z.: A direct probe of mass density near inspiraling binary black holes. Astrophys. J. **878**(2), 75 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ab20c6, arXiv:1805.05335

208. Rantala, A., Pihajoki, P., Johansson, P.H., Naab, T., Lahén, N., Sawala, T.: Post-newtonian dynamical modeling of supermassive black holes in galactic-scale simulations. ApJ **840**, 53 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa6d65, arXiv:1611.07028

209. Rantala, A., Johansson, P.H., Naab, T., Thomas, J., Frigo, M.: The formation of extremely diffuse galaxy cores by merging supermassive black holes. ApJ **864**, 113 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aada47, arXiv:1805.10295

210. Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Toonen, S., Korol, V., Torres, S.: Where are the double-degenerate progenitors of Type Ia supernovae? MNRAS **482**(3), 3656–3668 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty2965, arXiv:1809.07158

211. Regan, J.A., Downes, T.P.: Rise of the first supermassive stars. MNRAS **478**(4), 5037–5049 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1289, arXiv:1803.04527

212. Reines, A.E., Greene, J.E., Geha, M.: Dwarf galaxies with optical signatures of active massive black holes. ApJ **775**(2), 116 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/116, arXiv:1308.0328

213. Reisswig, C., Ott, C.D., Abdikamalov, E., Haas, R., Mösta, P., Schnetter, E.: Formation and coalescence of cosmological supermassive-black-hole binaries in supermassive-star collapse. Phys. Rev. Lett. **111**(15), 151101 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.151101, arXiv:1304.7787

214. Reitze, D., Adhikari, R.X., Ballmer, S., Barish, B., Barsotti, L., Billingsley, G., Brown, D.A., Chen, Y., Coyne, D., Eisenstein, R., Evans, M., Fritschel, P., Hall, E.D., Lazzarini, A., Lovelace, G., Read, J., Sathyaprakash, B.S., Shoemaker, D., Smith, J., Torrie, C., Vitale, S., Weiss, R., Wipf, C., Zucker, M.: Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO. arXiv:1907.04833 (2019)

215. Robson, T., Cornish, N.J., Tamanini, N., Toonen, S.: Detecting hierarchical stellar systems with LISA. Phys. Rev. D **98**(6), 064012 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.064012, arXiv:1806.00500
216. Roedig, C., Sesana, A.: Origin and Implications of high eccentricities in massive black hole binaries at sub-pc scales. In: Journal of Physics Conference Series, Journal of Physics Conference Series, vol. 363, p. 012035 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/363/1/012035, arXiv:1111.3742

217. Roedig, C., Sesana, A., Dotti, M., Cuadra, J., Amaro-Seoane, P., Haardt, F.: Evolution of binary black holes in self gravitating discs. Dissecting the torques. A & A 545, A127 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201219986, arXiv:1202.6063

218. Rossi, E.M., Lodato, G., Armitage, P.J., Pringle, J.E., King, A.R.: Black hole mergers: the first light. MNRAS 401(3), 2021–2035 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15802.x, arXiv:0910.0002

219. Ruan, W.H., Guo, Z.K., Cai, R.G., Zhang, Y.Z.: Taiji program: gravitational-wave sources. arXiv:1807.09495 (2018)

220. Ruiter, A.J., Belczynski, K., Benacquista, M., Larson, S.L., Williams, G.: The LISA gravitational wave foreground: a study of double white dwarfs. ApJ 717, 1006–1021 (2010). arXiv:0705.3272

221. Ryu, T., Perna, R., Haiman, Z., Ostriker, J.P., Stone, N.C.: Interactions between multiple supermassive black holes in galactic nuclei: a solution to the final parsec problem. MNRAS 473(3), 3410–3433 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx2524, arXiv:1709.06501

222. Saijo, M., Hawke, I.: Collapse of differentially rotating supermassive stars: Post black hole formation. Phys. Rev. D 80(6), 064001 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.80.064001, arXiv:0908.3002

223. Sanders, G.H.: The thirty meter telescope (TMT): an international observatory. J. Astrophys. Astron. 34(2), 81–86 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12036-013-9169-5

224. Santamaría, L., Ohme, F., Ajith, P., Brügmann, B., Dorband, N., Hannam, M., Husa, S., Mösta, P., Pollney, D., Reisswig, C., Robinson, E.L., Seiler, J., Krishnan, B.: Matching post-Newtonian and numerical relativity waveforms: Systematic errors and a new phenomenological model for nonprecessing black hole binaries. Phys. Rev. D 82(6), 064016 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.82.064016, arXiv:1005.3306

225. Schneider, P., Ehlers, J., Falco, E.E.: Gravitational Lenses. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03758-4 (1992)

226. Schnittman, J.D., Krolik, J.H.: The infrared afterglow of supermassive black hole mergers. ApJ 684(2), 835–844 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1086/590363, arXiv:0802.3556

227. Schnittman, J.D., Dal Canton, T., Camp, J., Tsang, D., Kelly, B.J.: Electromagnetic chirps from neutron star-black hole mergers. ApJ 853(2), 123 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aaa08b, arXiv:1704.07886

228. Schutz, B.F.: Determining the Hubble constant from gravitational wave observations. Nature 323(6086), 310–311 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1038/323310a0

229. Schwaller, P.: Gravitational waves from a dark phase transition. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115(181), 101 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.181101

230. Schwarz, D.J., Stuke, M.: Lepton asymmetry and the cosmic QCD transition. JCAP 0911, 025 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2009/11/025, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2010/10/E01, [Erratum: JCAP1010, E01(2010)], arXiv:0906.3434

231. Sereno, M., Sesana, A., Bleuler, A., Jetzer, P., Volonteri, M., Begelman, M.C.: Strong lensing of gravitational waves as seen by LISA. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105(25), 251101 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.251101, arXiv:1011.5238

232. Sereno, M., Jetzer, P., Sesana, A., Volonteri, M.: Cosmography with strong lensing of LISA gravitational wave sources. MNRAS 415(3), 2773–2781 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18895.x, arXiv:1104.1977

233. Sesana, A., Khan, F.M.: Scattering experiments meet N-body - I. A practical recipe for the evolution of massive black hole binaries in stellar environments. MNRAS 454(1), L66–L70 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnrasl/slv131, arXiv:1505.02062

234. Sesana, A., Vecchio, A.: Measuring the parameters of massive black hole binary systems with pulsar timing array observations of gravitational waves. Phys. Rev. D 81(10), 104008 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.81.104008, arXiv:1003.0677

235. Sesana, A., Gair, J., Berti, E., Volonteri, M.: Reconstructing the massive black hole cosmic history through gravitational waves. Phys. Rev. D 83(4), 044036 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.83.044036, arXiv:1011.5893
236. Seto, N.: Strong gravitational lensing and localization of merging massive black hole binaries with LISA. Phys. Rev. D **69**(2), 022002 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.69.022002, arXiv:astro-ph/0305605

237. Shao, L., Stairs, I., Antoniadis, J., Deller, A., Freire, P., Hessels, J., Janssen, G., Kramer, M., Kunz, J., Laemmerzahl, C., Perlick, V., Possenti, A., Ransom, S., Stappers, B., van Straten, W.: Testing gravity with pulsars in the ska era. In: Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), p. 42 (2015). arXiv:1501.00058

238. Shao, L., Sennett, N., Buonanno, A., Kramer, M., Wex, N.: Constraining nonperturbative strong-field effects in scalar-tensor gravity by combining pulsar timing and laser-interferometer gravitational-wave detectors. Phys. Rev. X **7**(4), 041025 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.7.041025, arXiv:1704.07561

239. Shi, J.M., Krolik, J.H., Lubow, S.H., Hawley, J.F.: Three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic simulations of circumbinary accretion disks: disk structures and angular momentum transport. ApJ **749**(2), 118 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/118, arXiv:1110.4866

240. Silva, H.O., Sakstein, J., Gualtieri, L., Sotiriou, T.P., Berti, E.: Spontaneous scalarization of black holes and compact stars from a Gauss-Bonnet coupling. Phys Rev Lett **131**(13), 104 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.131104, arXiv:1711.02080

241. Smartt, S.J., Chen, T.W., Jerkstrand, A., Coughlin, M., Kankare, E., Sim, S.A., Fraser, M., Inserra, C., Maguire, K., Chambers, K.C., Huber, M.E., Krühler, T., Leloudas, G., Magee, M., Shingles, L.J., Smith, K.W., Young, D.R., Tonry, J., Kotak, R., Gal-Yam, A., Lyman, J.D., Homan, D.S., Agliozzo, C., Anderson, J.P., Angus, C.R., Ashall, C., Barbarino, C., Bauer, F.E., Berton, M., Botticella, M.T., Bulla, M., Bulger, J., Cannizzaro, G., Cano, Z., Cartier, R., Cikota, A., Clark, P., De, C.ia.A., Della, V.alle.M., Denneau, L., Dennefeld, M., Dessart, L., Dimitriadis, G., Elias-Rosa, N., Firth, R.E., Flewelling, H., Flörs, A., Franckowiak, A., Frohmaier, C., Galbany, L., González-Gaitán, S., Greiner, J., Gromadzki, M., Guelbenzu, A.N., Gutiérrez, C.P., Hamanowicz, A., Hanlon, L., Harmanen, J., Heintz, K.E., Heinze, A., Hernandez, M.S., Hodgkin, S.T., Hook, I.M., Izzo, L., James, P.A., Jonker, P.G., Kerzendorf, W.E., Klose, S., Kostrzewa-Rutkowska, Z., Kowalski, M., Kromer, M., Kuncar-ayakti, H., Lawrence, A., Lowe, T.B., Magnier, E.A., Manulis, I., Martin-Carrillo, A., Mattila, S., McBrien, O., Müller, A., Nordin, J., O'Neill, D., Onori, F., Palmerio, J.T., Pastorello, A., Patat, F., Pignata, G., Podsiadlowski, P., Pumo, M.L., Prentice, S.J., Rau, A., Razza, A., Rest, A., Reynolds, T., Roy, R., Ruiter, A.J., Rybicki, K.A., Salmon, L., Schady, P., Schultz, A.S.B., Schweyer, T., Seiten-zahl, I.R., Smith, M., Sollerman, J., Stalder, B., Stubbs, C.W., Sullivan, M., Szegedi, H., Taddia, F., Taubenberger, S., Terreran, G., van, S.oelen.B., Vos, J., Wainscoat, R.J., Walton, N.A., Waters, C., Weiland, H., Willman, M., Wiseman, P., Wright, D.E., Wyrzykowski, Ł., Yaron, O.: A kilonova as the electromagnetic counterpart to a gravitational-wave source. Nature **551**(7678), 75–79 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24303, arXiv:1710.05841

242. Soares-Santos, M., et al.: First measurement of the hubble constant from a dark standard siren using the dark energy survey galaxies and the LIGO/Virgo binary–black-hole merger GW170814. Astrophys. J. **876**(1), L7 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab14f1, arXiv:1901.01540

243. Soltan, A.: Masses of quasars. MNRAS **200**, 115–122 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/200.1.115

244. Souza Lima, R., Mayer, L., Capelo, P.R., Bellovary, J.M.: The pairing of accreting massive black holes in multiphase circumnuclear disks: the interplay between radiative cooling, star formation, and feedback processes. ApJ **838**(1), 13 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa5d19, arXiv:1610.01600

245. Spallicci, A.D.A.M.: On the complementarity of pulsar timing and space laser interferometry for the individual detection of supermassive black hole binaries. ApJ **764**(2), 187 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/764/2/187, arXiv:1107.5984

246. Yamada, T., Gehrels, N., Baltay, C., Bennett, D., Breckinridge, J., Donahue, M., Dressler, A., Gaudi, B.S., Greene, T., Guyon, O., Hirata, C., Kalirai, J., Kasdin, N.J., Macintosh, B., Moos, W., Perlmutter, S., Postman, M., Rauscher, B., Rhodes, J., Wang, Y., Weinberg, D., Benford, D., Hudson, M., Jeong, W.S., Mellier, Y., Traub, W., Yamada, T., Capak, P., Colbert, J., Masters, D., Penny, M., Savransky, D., Stern, D., Zimmerman, N., Barry, R., Bartusek, L., Carpenter, K., Cheng, E., Content, D., Dekens, F., Demers, R., Grady, K., Jackson, C., Kuan, G., Kruk, J., Melton, M., Nemati, B., Parvin, B., Poberezhskiy, I., Peddie, C., Ruffa, J., Wallace, J.K., Whipple, A., Wollack, E., Zhao, F.: Wide-field infrared survey telescope-astrophysics focused telescope assets WFIRST-AFTA 2015 report. arXiv:1503.03757 (2015)
247. Stephanov, M.A.: QCD phase diagram: an overview. PoS LAT2006, 024 (2006). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.032.0024, arXiv:hep-lat/0701002

248. Strominger, A., Zhiboedov, A.: Gravitational memory, BMS supertranslations and soft theorems. arXiv:1503.03757 (2014)

249. Takahashi, R., Nakamura, T.: Wave effects in the gravitational lensing of gravitational waves from chirping binaries. ApJ 595(2), 1039–1051 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1086/377430, arXiv:hep-lat/0701002

250. Takeda, H., Nishizawa, A., Michimura, Y., Nagano, K., Komori, K., Ando, M., Hayama, K.: Polarization test of gravitational waves from compact binary coalescences. Phys. Rev. D 98(2), 022008 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.022008, arXiv:1806.02182

251. Tamanini, N., Daniëlski, C.: The gravitational-wave detection of exoplanets orbiting white dwarf binaries using LISA. Nat. Astron. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-019-0807-y (2019)

252. Tamanini, N., Caprini, C., Barausse, E., Sesana, A., Klein, A., Petiteau, A.: Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA. III: probing the expansion of the universe using gravitational wave standard sirens. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2016(4), 002 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/04/002, arXiv:1601.07112

253. Tamanini, N., Klein, A., Bonvin, C., Barausse, E., Caprini, C.: Peculiar acceleration of stellar-origin black hole binaries: Measurement and biases with LISA. Phys. Rev. D 101(6), 063002 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.063002, arXiv:1907.02018

254. Tamburello, V., Capelo, P.R., Mayer, L., Bellovary, J.M., Wadsley, J.W.: Supermassive black hole pairs in clumpy galaxies at high redshift: delayed binary formation and concurrent mass growth. MNRAS 464(3), 2952–2962 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw2561, arXiv:1603.00021

255. Tamfal, T., Capelo, P.R., Kazantzidis, S., Mayer, L., Potter, D., Stadel, J., Widrow, L.M.: Formation of LISA Black Hole Binaries in Merging Dwarf Galaxies: The Imprint of Dark Matter. ApJL 864(1), L19 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aada4b, arXiv:1806.11112

256. Tang, Y., MacFadyen, A., Haiman, Z.: On the orbital evolution of supermassive black hole binaries with circumbinary accretion discs. MNRAS 469(4), 4258–4267 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx1130, arXiv:1703.03913

257. Tang, Y., Haiman, Z., MacFadyen, A.: The late inspiral of supermassive black hole binaries with circumbinary gas discs in the LISA band. MNRAS 476(2), 2249–2257 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty423, arXiv:1801.02266

258. Tanvir, N.R., Levan, A.J., González-Fernández, C., Korobkin, O., Mandel, I., Rosswog, S., Hjorth, J., D'Avanzo, P., Fruchter, A.S., Fryer, C.L., Kangas, T., Milvang-Jensen, B., Rosetti, S., Steeghs, D., Wollaeger, R.T., Cano, Z., Copperwheat, C.M., Covino, S., D'Elia, V., de Ugarte Postigo, A., Evans, P.A., Even, W.P., Fairhurst, S., Figuera, J.aimes.R., Fontes, C.J., Fujii, Y.I., Fynbo, J.P.U., Gompertz, B.P., Greiner, J., Hodosan, G., Irwin, M.J., Jakobsson, P., Jørgensen, U.G., Kann, D.A., Lyman, J.D., Malesani, D., McMahon, R.G., Melandri, A., O'Brien, P.T., Osborne, J.P., Palazzi, E., Perley, D.A., Pian, E., Piranomonte, S., Rabus, M., Rol, E., Rowlinson, A., Schulze, S., Sutton, P., Thöne, C.C., Ulaczyk, K., Watson, D., Wiersema, K., Wijers, R.A.M.J.: The emergence of a lanthanide-rich kilonova following the merger of two neutron stars. ApJL 848(2), L27 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aa90b6, arXiv:1710.05455

259. Tauris, T.M.: Disentangling coalescing neutron-star-white-dwarf binaries for LISA. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(13), 131105 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.131105, arXiv:1809.03504

260. Taylor, J.H., Weisberg, J.M.: A new test of general relativity - Gravitational radiation and the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. ApJ 253, 908–920 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1086/159690

261. The COrE Collaboration, Armitage-Caplan, C., Avillez, M., Barbosa, D., Banday, A., Bartolo, N., Battye, R., Bernard, J., de Bernardis, P., Basak, S., Bersanelli, M., Bielewicz, P., Bonaldi, A., Bucher, M., Bouchet, F., Boulanger, F., Burigana, C., Camus, P., Challinor, A., Chongchitnan, S., Clements, D., Colafrancesco, S., Delabrouille, J., De Petris, M., De Zotti, G., Dickinson, C., Dunkley, J., Ensslin, T., Fergusson, J., Ferreira, P., Ferriere, K., Finelli, F., Galli, S., Garcia-Bellido, J., Gauthier, C., Haverkorn, M., Hindmarsh, M., Jaffe, A., Kunz, M., Lesgourgues, J., Liddle, A., Liguori, M., Lopez-Caniego, M., Maffei, B., Marchegiani, P., Martinez-Gonzalez, E., Masi, S., Mauskopf, P., Matarrese, S., Melchiorri, A., Mukherjee, P., Nati, F., Natoli, P., Negrello, M., Pagano, L., Paoletti, D., Peacocke, T., Peiris, H., Perroto, L., Piacentini, F., Piat, M., Piccirillo, L., Pisano, G., Ponthieu, N., Rath, C., Ricciardi, S., Rubino Martin, J., Salatino, M., Shellard, P., Stompor, R., Urrestilla, L.T.J., Van Tent, B., Verde, L., Wandelt, B., Withington, S.: COrE (Cosmic Origins Explorer) A White Paper. arXiv:1102.2181 (2011)
262. Thorne, K.S.: Gravitational-wave bursts with memory: The Christodoulou effect. Phys. Rev. D **45**(2), 520–524 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.45.520

263. Tinto, M., Dhurandhar, S.V.: Time-Delay Interferometry. Living Rev. Relativ. **8**(1), 4 (2005). https://doi.org/10.12942/lrr-2005-4

264. Toonen, S., Nelemans, G.: The effect of common-envelope evolution on the visible population of post-common-envelope binaries. A & A **557**, A87 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201321753

265. Toonen, S., Nelemans, G., Portegies Zwart, S.: Supernova Type Ia progenitors from merging double white dwarfs. Using a new population synthesis model. A & A **546**, A70 (2012)

266. Tremaine, S.D., Ostriker, J.P., Spitzer, L.Jr.: The formation of the nuclei of galaxies. I - M31. ApJ **196**, 407–411 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1086/153422

267. Tröbs, M., Barke, S., Theeg, T., Kracht, D., Heinzel, G., Danzmann, K.: Differential phase-noise properties of a ytterbium-doped fiber amplifier for the laser interferometer space antenna. Opt. Lett. **35**(3), 435–437 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.35.000435, http://ol.osa.org/abstract.cfm?URI=ol-35-3-435

268. Vachaspati, T., Vilenkin, A.: Gravitational radiation from cosmic strings. Phys. Rev. D **31**(12), 3052–3058 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.31.3052

269. Van Wassenhove, S., Capelo, P.R., Volonteri, M., Dotti, M., Bellovary, J.M., Mayer, L., Governato, F.: Nuclear coups: dynamics of black holes in galaxy mergers. MNRAS **439**(1), 474–487 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu024, arXiv:1310.7581

270. Vasiliev, E., Antonini, F., Merritt, D.: The final-parsec problem in the collisionless limit. ApJ **810**(1), 49 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/49, arXiv:1505.05480

271. Verbiest, J.P.W., Lentati, L., Hobbs, G., van Haasteren, R., Demorest, P.B., Janssen, G.H., Wang, J.B., Desvignes, G., Caballero, R.N., Keith, M.J., Champion, D.J., Arzoumanian, Z., Babak, S., Bassa, C.G., Bhat, N.D.R., Brazier, A., Brem, P., Burgay, M., Burke-Spolaor, S., Chamberlin, S.J., Chatterjee, S., Christy, B., Cognard, I., Cordes, J.M., Dai, S., Dolch, T., Ellis, J.A., Ferdman, R.D., Fonseca, E., Gair, J.R., Garver-Daniels, N.E., Gentile, P., Gonzalez, M.E., Graikou, E., Guillemot, L., Hessels, J.W.T., Jones, G., Karuppusamy, R., Kerr, M., Kramer, M., Lam, M.T., Lasky, P.D., Lasus, A., Lazarus, P., Lazio, T.J.W., Lee, K.J., Levin, L., Liu, K., Lynch, R.S., Lyne, A.G., Mckee, J., McLaughlin, M.A., McWilliams, S.T., Madison, D.R., Manchester, R.N., Mingarelli, C.M.F., Nice, D.J., Oslowski, S., Palliyaguru, N.T., Pennucci, T.T., Perera, B.B.P., Perrodin, D., Possenti, A., Petiteau, A., Ransom, S.M., Reardon, D., Rosado, P.A., Sanidas, S.A., Sesana, A., Shaifullah, G., Shannon, R.M., Siemens, X., Simon, J., Smits, R., Spiewak, R., Stairs, I.H., Stappers, B.W., Stinebring, D.R., Stovall, K., Swiggum, J.K., Taylor, S.R., Theureau, G., Tiburzi, C., Toomey, L., Vallisneri, M., van Straten, W., Vecchio, A., Wang, Y., Wen, L., You, X.P., Zhu, W.W., Zhu, X.J.: The international pulsar timing array: first data release. MNRAS **458**(2), 1267–1288 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw347, arXiv:1602.03640

272. Vigna-Gómez, A., Neijssel, C.J., Stevenson, S., Barrett, J.W., Belczynski, K., Justham, S., de Mink, S.E., Müller, B., Podsiadlowski, P., Renzo, M., Szécsi, D., Mandel, I.: On the formation history of Galactic double neutron stars. MNRAS **481**(3), 4009–4029 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty2463, arXiv:1805.07974

273. Visbal, E., Haiman, Z.: Identifying direct collapse black hole seeds through their small host galaxies. ApJL **865**(1), L9 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aadf3a, arXiv:1809.01754

274. Volonteri, M., Natarajan, P.: Journey to the $M_{BH}-\sigma$ relation: the fate of low-mass black holes in the Universe. MNRAS **400**(4), 1911–1918 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15577.x, arXiv:0903.2262

275. Volonteri, M., Rees, M.J.: Rapid growth of high-redshift black holes. ApJ **633**(2), 624–629 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1086/466521, arXiv:astro-ph/0506040

276. Wang, B., Han, Z.: Progenitors of type Ia supernovae. New Astr. Rev. **56**(4), 122–141 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newar.2012.04.001, arXiv:1204.1155

277. Warner, B.: Catarclysmic variable stars. Cambridge Astrophysics Series. p. 28 (1995)

278. Will, C.M.: The confrontation between general relativity and experiment. Living Rev. Relativ. **17**(1), 4 (2014). https://doi.org/10.12942/lrr-2014-4, arXiv:1403.7377

279. Will, C.M.: Testing general relativity with compact-body orbits: a modified Einstein-Infeld-Hoffmann framework. Class. Quantum Gravity **35**(8), 085001 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aab1c6, arXiv:1801.08999
280. Wong, K.W.K., Baibhav, V., Berti, E.: Binary radial velocity measurements with space-based gravitational-wave detectors. MNRAS 488(4), 5665–5670 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz2077, arXiv:1902.01402

281. Woods, T.E., Agarwal, B., Bromm, V., Bunker, A., Chen, K.J., Chon, S., Ferrara, A., Glover, S.C.O., Haemmerlé, L., Haiman, Z., Hartwig, T., Heger, A., Hirano, S., Hosokawa, T., Inayoshi, K., Klessen, R.S., Kobayashi, C., Koliopanos, F., Latif, M.A., Li, Y., Mayer, L., Mezcue, M., Natarajan, P., Pacucci, F., Rees, M.J., Regan, J.A., Sakurai, Y., Salvadori, S., Schneider, R., Surace, M., Tanaka, T.L., Whalen, D.J., Yoshida, N.: Titans of the early Universe: The Prato statement on the origin of the first supermassive black holes. PASA e027, 36 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/pasa.2019.14, arXiv:1810.12310

282. Wu, X.B., Wang, F., Fan, X., Yi, W., Zuo, W., Bian, F., Jiang, L., McGreer, I.D., Wang, R., Yang, J., Yang, Q., Thompson, D., Beletsky, Y.: An ultraluminous quasar with a twelve-billion-solar-mass black hole at redshift 6.30. Nature 518(7540), 512–515 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14241, arXiv:1502.07418

283. Yagi, K., Stein, L.C., Yunes, N.: Challenging the presence of scalar charge and dipolar radiation in binary pulsars. Phys. Rev. D 93(2), 024010 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.024010, arXiv:1510.02152

284. Yu, Q., Tremaine, S.: Observational constraints on growth of massive black holes. MNRAS 335(4), 965–976 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05532.x, arXiv:astro-ph/0203082

285. Zel'dovich, Y.B., Polnarev, A.G.: Radiation of gravitational waves by a cluster of superdense stars. Sov. Astron. 18, 17 (1974)

**Publisher's note** Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Affiliations

Alberto Sesana¹ ID • Natalia Korsakova² ID • Manuel Arca Sedda³ •

Vishal Baibhav⁴ • Enrico Barausse⁵ • Simon Barke⁶ • Emanuele Berti⁴ •

Matteo Bonetti¹ • Pedro R. Capelo⁷ • Chiara Caprini⁸ • Juan Garcia-Bellido⁹ •

Zoltan Haiman¹⁰ • Karan Jani¹¹ • Oliver Jennrich¹² • Peter H. Johansson¹³ •

Fazeel Mahmood Khan¹⁴ • Valeriya Korol¹⁵ • Astrid Lamberts² •

Alessandro Lupi¹,¹⁶ • Alberto Mangiagli¹ • Lucio Mayer⁷ •

Germano Nardini¹⁷ • Fabio Pacucci¹⁸ • Antoine Petiteau⁸ • Alvise Raccanelli¹⁹ •

Surjeet Rajendran³ • John Regan²⁰ • Lijing Shao²¹ • Alessandro Spallicci²² •

Nicola Tamanini²³ • Marta Volonteri²⁴ • Niels Warburton²⁵ • Kaze Wong⁴ •

Miguel Zumalacarregui²⁶

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

Natalia Korsakova
natalia.korsakova@oca.eu

1 Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

2 Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur, Nice, France

3 Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

4 Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD USA

5 Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati, Trieste, Italy

6 University of Florida, Gainesville, FL USA

7 Center for Theoretical Astrophysics and Cosmology, Institute for Computational Science, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057, Zurich, Switzerland

8 Laboratoire Astroparticule et Cosmologie, Paris, France

9 Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

10 Columbia University, New York, NY USA

11 Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA USA

12 European Space Agency, ESTEC, The Netherlands

13 University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

14 Institute of Space Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan

15 Leiden Observatory, Leiden, Netherlands

16 Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy

17 Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger, 4036 Stavanger, Norway

18 Center for Astrophysics, Harvard & Smithsonian, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA, Black Hole Initiative, Harvard University, MA Cambridge, 02138, USA

19 CERN, Geneva, Switzerland

20 Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

21 Kavli Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Peking University, Beijing, China

22 Université d'Orléans - Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, LPC2E UMR, 7328, Orléans, France

23 Laboratoire de 2 infinis - Toulouse, Toulouse, France

24 Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris, Paris, France

25 University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

26 University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA USA