Arxiv:2007.04781V1 [Astro-Ph.HE] 9 Jul 2020 Also Ozel¨ Et Al

Draft version July 10, 2020 Typeset using LATEX twocolumn style in AASTeX62

Black Hole Formation in the Lower Mass Gap through Mergers and Accretion in AGN Disks

Y. Yang,1 V. Gayathri,1 I. Bartos,1, ∗ Z. Haiman,2 M. Safarzadeh,3 and H. Tagawa4

1Department of Physics, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-8440, USA 2Department of Astronomy, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10027, USA 3Center for Astrophysics — Harvard & Smithsonian, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA, USA 4Astronomical Institute, Graduate School of Science, Tohoku University, Aoba, Sendai 980-8578, Japan

ABSTRACT The heaviest neutron stars and lightest black holes expected to be produced by stellar evolution leave the mass-range 2.2 M . m . 5 M largely unpopulated. Objects found in this so-called lower mass gap likely originate from a distinct astrophysical process. Such an object, with mass 2.6 M was recently detected in the binary merger GW190814 through gravitational waves by LIGO/Virgo. Here we show that black holes in the mass gap are naturally assembled through mergers and accretion in AGN disks, and can subsequently participate in additional mergers. We compute the properties of AGN-assisted mergers involving neutron stars and black holes, accounting for accretion. We ﬁnd that mergers in which one of the objects is in the lower mass gap represent up to 4% of AGN- assisted mergers detectable by LIGO/Virgo. The lighter object of GW190814, with mass 2.6 M , could have grown in an AGN disk through accretion. We ﬁnd that the unexpectedly high total mass of 3.4 M observed in the neutron star merger GW190425 may also be due to accretion in an AGN disk.

5 1. INTRODUCTION AGN (0.7 M) AGN ( 1 M ) The rapidly growing number of gravitational wave dis- 4 Edd AGN ( 10 MEdd) coveries by LIGO and Virgo have brought about several Galactic BNS 3 surprises (Aasi et al. 2015; Acernese et al. 2015; Ab- GW190425 ( < 0.89)

bott et al. 2019). Surprises included the unexpectedly PDF 2 high mass of some of the black holes, suggesting that

they may have been formed through hierarchical merg- 1 ers (Yang et al. 2019b; Tagawa et al. 2019; Safarzadeh

et al. 2020; Gayathri et al. 2020; Gerosa et al. 2020; 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Kimball et al. 2020). Total mass (M ) More recently, two gravitational-wave detections un- Figure 1. Probability density of total mass in compact bi- covered objects with unexpected masses in the few-solar nary mergers in AGNs, assuming a maximum accretion rate mass range. First, neutron star merger GW190425 fea- of 1M˙ Edd (red) and 10M˙ Edd (black), below a total mass of tured a total mass of ∼ 3.4 M (Abbott et al. 2020). 5 M . Also shown are the total mass probability density of This is substantially higher than expected from Galac- GW190425 (blue; assuming a uniform spin prior χ < 0.89; tic binary neutron star systems that have a total mass Abbott et al. 2020), and the distribution of observed Galactic binary neutron star systems (gray). of ≈ 2.66 ± 0.13 (see the gray histogram in Fig.1; see arXiv:2007.04781v1 [astro-ph.HE] 9 Jul 2020 also Ozel¨ et al. 2012). Second, in the binary merger GW190814, one of the observed objects had a mass of mass gap are being investigated, however these models currently have difficulty explaining the overall binary 2.6 M . This mass is higher than the maximum mass meregr rate observed by LIGO/Virgo (Zevin et al. 2020). of non-rotating neutron stars (≈ 2.2 M ; Margalit & Metzger 2017), and falls in the so-called lower mass gap Other than problems with our current understanding of stellar evolution, two processes can result in objects of ∼ 2.2 − 5 M where objects are not expected from standard stellar evolution. Possible alternative super- in the ∼ 2.2 − 5 M range: (1) the merger of neu- nova explosion scenarios that could populate the lower tron stars and (2) accretion. For the former to be rele- vant for observations of binary mergers with a component in the mass gap, neutron star mergers must oc- ∗ imrebartos@ufl.edu cur in dense stellar environments, such as galactic cen- 2 ters, where the merger remnant can encounter another & Gould 2000). We adopted an initial mass function compact object, resulting in a binary merger that can dN/dm ∝ m−2.35 for black holes, where m is the black be detected through gravitational waves (Gupta et al. hole mass. We took 5 M and 50 M as the bounds of 2020). For the latter, this accretion must be distinct the black hole initial mass function. from the one observed in X-ray binaries, where accretion For neutron stars, we considered the mass distribu- is not high enough to substantially increase neutron star tion of 1.49 ± 0.19 M observed for small spin period masses (Ozel & Freire 2016). pulsars and neutron stars with high-mass companions Active galactic nuclei (AGNs) represent an environ- (Ozel & Freire 2016). This mass distribution is likely ment where both hierarchical neutron star mergers and near the birth masses of neutron stars that do not reside significant accretion can naturally occur. AGNs har- in binary neutron star systems. Given the comparable bor a large population of neutron stars and black holes number of neutron star observations with neutron star within the innermost parsec around a central supermas- and high-mass companions, and the fact that the lat- sive black hole (SMBH; Hopman & Alexander 2006; ter have a much shorter lifetime due to the lifetime of O’Leary et al. 2009; Hailey et al. 2018; Bartos et al. the companions, this high-mass companion population 2013). These neutron stars and black holes interact with is likely representative for the neutron star population the dense accretion disk around the supermassive black as a whole. Both initial neutron stars and black holes hole, resulting in the orbital alignment of some of these were assumed to be spinless. This assumption does not objects and the disk (Bartos et al. 2017). Once aligned, meaningfully affect the resulting mass distribution. the neutron stars and black holes can migrate within Once a neutron star exceeded 2.2 M due to accretion the disk, resulting in their merger either in migration or merger, we considered it to become a black hole (Mar- traps (Bellovary et al. 2016) or at radii with high rate of galit & Metzger 2017). The mass at which gravitational interaction with stars and compact objects outside the collapse occurs depends on the neutron star’s spin (Most disk (Tagawa et al. 2019, 2020). et al. 2020), however, this limit does not substantially AGNs have been proposed to assist stellar-mass black affect our results below. hole mergers (Bartos et al. 2017; Stone et al. 2017; McK- We took into account the mass segregation in the spa- ernan et al. 2018; Yang et al. 2020; McKernan et al. tial distributions of black holes and neutron stars, which 2019; Yang et al. 2019a). They have been proposed as are functions of the orbits semi-major axis (Gondán a site for hierarchical black hole mergers, and several of et al. 2018; Alexander & Hopman 2009): LIGO/Virgo’s binary sources were shown to be consis- dnbh tent with an hierarchical-AGN origin (Yang et al. 2019; ∝ a−3/2−0.5Mbh/Mmax (1) da Gayathri et al. 2020; Tagawa et al. 2019). The possibil- dnns ity that neutron stars can also merge in AGN disks has ∝ a−3/2 (2) da been proposed by McKernan et al.(2020), while the role where a is the semi-major axes of the object’s orbit of accretion on black hole spins in AGNs was studied by around the SMBH, and M = 50 M . The higher- Yi et al.(2018). max mass black holes typically are closer to the SMBH and In this paper we investigate the properties of compact neutron stars are farther away. We assumed that the binary mergers in AGNs, for the first time taking into maximal semi-major axis is the radius of influence of account both the effects of hierarchical mergers and ac- the SMBH R = 1.2M 1/2 pc, where M = M /106M cretion. This combination is important to quantitatively inf 6 6 • with M being the SMBH mass. probe the properties of objects in the lower mass gap, • Following Bartos et al.(2017), we adopted a geomet- which we focus on here. We consider whether binaries rically thin, optically thick, radiatively efficient, steady- GW190425 and GW190814 observed through gravita- state accretion disk expected in AGNs. We used a vis- tional waves could have been produced in AGNs. cosity parameter α = 0.3, radiation efficiency = 0.1. 2. METHOD Observations indicate that the SMBH accretion rate for AGNs from Seyfert galaxies to bright quasars varies 2.1. Orbital alignment −3 betweenm ˙ = M˙ •/M˙ •,Edd = 10 − 1 (Woo & Urry 2 We postulated that the total number of neutron stars 2002), where M˙ Edd = LEdd/c is the Eddington rate in galactic nuclei is ten times the total number of stellar- and LEdd is the Eddington luminosity. In our models mass black holes (Hopman & Alexander 2006; Alexan- the merger rate only changes by less than an order of der & Hopman 2009). The total mass of the latter magnitude between these two extreme values (see Fig.5 population is 1.6% of the stellar mass in galactic cen- in Yang et al. 2019a). For simplicity, we therefore adopt ters, i.e. about twice the SMBH’s mass (Miralda-Escudé the single valuem ˙ = 0.1 and the abundance of Seyfert 3 galaxies to be representative, for the purpose of estimat- around the gap boundary. The migration time scale for ing the global merger rate. a massive migrator is given by (Duffell et al. 2014; Fung We followed the method described in Yang et al. et al. 2014; Kanagawa et al. 2015, 2018) (2019a) and conducted a Monte Carlo simulation of 105 t = (1 + 0.04K)t (5) samples, taking the evolution of orbits of neutron stars I/II I 2 −5 −1 and black holes to be independent. where K = (Mbh/M•) (H/r) α and α is the viscos- Since black holes and neutron stars can accrete matter ity parameter. The migration speed of the objects in from the AGN disk every time they cross it, we take the AGN disk is dr/dt = −r/tI/II (Tagawa et al. 2019). accretion into account in our simulations. The mass of During the migration of black holes and neutron stars the gravitationally captured gas during each crossing is within the AGN disk, we assumed that they accrete at (Bartos et al. 2017; Yang et al. 2019a) the Eddington accretion rate (or alternatively, 10 times the Eddington rate, identically to the maximum value 2 ∆Mcross = ∆vtcrossrBHLπΣ/(2H) (3) considered in the alignment phase above). We adopted 2 2 fmig = 2 and α = 0.1 as a set of fiducial parameters where rBHL ≡ 2GMbh/(∆v + cs) is the BH’s Bondi- Hoyle-Lyttleton radius, Σ and H are the surface density in our numerical simulations. For an SMBH with mass 6 10 M , we found that the average number of black holes and scale height of the AGN disk respectively, tcross ≡ 2H/v is the crossing time, v is the z component of the whose orbits are aligned with the AGN disk within the z z 7 object’s velocity and ∆v is the relative velocity between AGN lifetime (τAGN ∼ 10 yr) is 3, whereas that of neu- the gas and the object upon crossing. tron stars is about 19. To take into account that not all captured gas may If more than one object ends up in the AGN disk, we accrete onto the compact object, we considered three expect that they merge hierarchically as they migrate accretion efficiency models. In the first model, we as- within the disk (Yang et al. 2019). We assumed that sumed that 70% of the infalling mass will be accreted, the numbers of neutron stars and black holes that move as indicated by state-of-the-art numerical simulations into the disk follow independent Poisson distributions. of super-Eddington accretion (with the remaining 30% We evaluated the mass and spin distributions of the rem- ejected in an outflow; Jiang et al. 2019). In the second nants of binary black holes (BBH) mergers adopting the and third models, we limit the maximum accretion to methods described in Barausse et al.(2012); Hofmann et al.(2016). We computed the mass and spin distribu- 1M˙ Edd and 10M˙ Edd, respectively. Here, = 0.1 is the radiation efficiency. We assumed that accretion occurs tions of the remnants of neutron star–black hole mergers during the crossing and a following period equal to the following Zappa et al.(2019) and calculated the mass distributions of binary neutron star mergers following fallback time rBHL/∆v within the radius of gravitational capture (although in practice the latter is small). Zappa et al.(2018) and Bernuzzi et al.(2014). We then 6 Below we adopt a fiducial SMBH mass of M = simulated of 10 samples to characterize the distribu- • 1 6 tions of binaries’ masses and effective spins. 10 M , but note that our results only weakly depend on M• (Yang et al. 2019a). 3. RESULTS 2.2. Migration and merger The mass distributions we obtained through Monte Carlo simulations are shown in Fig.2, both for the Neutron stars and stellar-mass black holes are as- 1M˙ and 10M˙ limits. The distribution of the total sumed to drift from their original locations inward once Edd Edd mass of binaries is shown in Fig.1. We found that the they have been aligned with AGN disk (Tagawa et al. mass distribution at low masses substantially deviates 2020). The type I time scale for migration due to Lind- from a simple power law, with clear peaks and troughs. blad and corotation resonance is (Paardekooper et al. This oscillatory distribution is the consequence of hier- 2010; Baruteau et al. 2011; Tanaka et al. 2002) archical neutron star mergers. The width of each period 2 in these bands is determined by the initial mass distri- 1 M• M• H −1 tI = 2 Ω . (4) bution of neutron stars, and accretion. 2fmig Mbh Σr r We computed the merger rate of binary neutron stars, Here, fmig is a dimensionless factor and Ω is the Keple- neutron star–black hole and binary black hole systems rian angular velocity of an orbit with radius r. However, a gap will open around the object that moves in the disk 1 c S~1 S~2 L~ χeff ≡ + · , where M = m1 + m2 is the if the gravitational torque exerted by the object exceeds GM m1 m2 |L~ | the viscous torque of gas, thus the object will experi- total mass of the binary, S~1,2 are the spin parameters of the two ence type II migration due to the torque from the gas compact stars in the binary. 4

Type Merger rate Merger rate density Det. fraction [10−7yr−1] [Gpc−3yr−1] [%]

0.7M˙ 1 MEdd 10 MEdd 0.7M˙ 1 MEdd 10 MEdd 0.7M˙ 1 MEdd 10 MEdd BNS 0.01 0.4 0.3 0.02 0.6 0.6 0.0001 0.01 0.005 NS-BH 0.06 3.5 3.4 1.1 6.3 6.1 0.07 0.9 0.5 BBH 5.0 2.3 2.5 9.0 4.1 4.5 99.9 99.1 99.5

2.2 M < M < 5 M 1.7 0.7 0.8 3.1 1.2 1.5 3.9 0.5 0.4

50 M < M 1.7 2.2 3.1 3.0 3.8 5.6 76.7 52.3 76

65 M < M 1.5 1.2 2.4 2.6 2.2 4.2 60.8 26.5 57 Table 1. Merger rate and detection fraction for diﬀerent types of compact binary mergers. We show the merger rate in a given AGN, the merger rate density in the local universe, for the three accretion models considered here. We additionally show the expected fraction of LIGO/Virgo observations for each binary type, taking into account the mass-dependent sensitive distance of LIGO/Virgo at design sensitivity. We consider binary neutron stars (BNS), neutron star–black hole systems (NS-BH) and binary black holes (BBH). An object with mass > 2.2 M is considered a black hole. We further show these quantities separately for those binaries in which one of the masses falls into the lower mass gap (2.2 M < M < 5 M ) or the upper mass gap (considering two lower bounds of this mass gap, 50 M and 65 M ). in a single AGN. We adopted a number density of 100 101 102 −3 nSeyfert = 0.018 Mpc for Seyfert galaxies (Hao et al. 10 1 2005) and converted the single-AGN merger rate to the local merger rate density using Rcosmic = nSeyfertRsingle. This conversion is justiﬁed as Rsingle only weakly depends on the SMBH mass in the galaxy. The obtained 10 2 rates are listed in Table1. We see that the merger rates of binary neutron star,

neutron star–black hole and binary black hole systems PDF are comparable in AGNs. However, since the sensitivity of LIGO/Virgo strongly depends on mass, the relative 10 3 detection rates of the different types will be markedly 0.7M different from their merger rates. We computed the frac- 1MEdd 10MEdd tional detection rates of the different merger types con- m2 GW190814 10 4 sidering LIGO/Virgo’s design sensitivity. The relative 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 fractions we obtained are listed in Table1. We see that Mass (M ) the detection rate is dominated by binary black holes. Mergers in which one of the objects is in the lower mass Figure 2. The mass distributions of compact objects un- gap will represent ∼ 1% of detections, i.e. their detec- dergoing mergers in AGN disks. The main figure shows the tion is expected once the total number of detected events distribution in the lower mass gap, while the inset shows the distribution for a wider range of masses. We show results for is O(100). three accretion models: when 70% of the infalling matter is 4. CONCLUSIONS accreted onto the compact object (red; Jiang et al. 2019); accretion limited to 1M˙ Edd (black) and to 10M˙ Edd (green). For We investigated the effect of hierarchical mergers and comparison, we show the distribution of the lighter compo- accretion in AGN disks on the mass distribution of neu- nent mass m2 of binary merger GW190814 (orange; Abbott tron stars and black holes, mainly focusing on the lower et al. 2020), as well as our initial mass function for neutron stars (blue dashed, main figure) and black holes (blue dashed, mass gap, 2.2−5 M . Our conclusions are the following: inset). We also show the expected mass ranges of neutron • Neutron star–black hole and binary black hole stars and hierarchically merged neutron stars the Galactic mergers are expected in AGNs at comparable mass distribution found in binary neutron star systems, ne- rates, while binary neutron star mergers are also glecting mass loss or accretion (vertical gray bands). expected but less often (see Table1). (99%), with 1% contribution from neutron star– • Up to 4% of AGN-assisted binary mergers ob- . black hole mergers, and 1% fractional detection served by LIGO/Virgo will include a component from binary neutron stars (see Table1). in the lower mass gap. Gravitational-wave detections from AGNs will be mostly binary black holes 5

• Both accretion and hierarchical mergers signiﬁ- cantly contribute to the resulting mass distribution of binary mergers in AGNs.

• The 2.6 M mass of the mass-gap object in binary merger GW190814 (see Fig.2), as well as the bi- 10 3 nary’s mass ratio (see Fig.3) is consistent with PDF having arisen in an AGN disk. An AGN origin also naturally explains the observed high mass ratio for 0.7M the event, which is unlikely in ﬁeld binaries (Sa- 1M Edd farzadeh & Hotokezaka 2020) and is suppressed in 10MEdd GW190814 globular clusters due to mass segregation (Gerosa GW190425 et al. 2020). 10 4 10 2 10 1 100 q = m2/m1 • The binary neutron star merger GW190425 had a total mass consistent with the expected mass dis- Figure 3. The mass ratio distributions of compact objects undergoing mergers in AGN disks. The plot shows the distribution in AGNs. However, the small expected tribution of mass ratio around the lower mass gap. We show detection rate of neutron star mergers in AGNs results for three accretion models: when 70% of the infalling decreases the likelihood of an AGN origin. matter is accreted onto the compact object (red; Jiang et al. 2019); accretion is limited to 1M˙ Edd (black) and to 10M˙ Edd ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (green). For comparison, we show the mass ratio limit for bi- We thank Yan-Fei Jiang and Christopher Berry for nary merger GW190814 (light blue; Abbott et al. 2020) and GW190425 (blue; assuming a uniform spin prior χ < 0.89; helpful discussions. IB acknowledges support from Abbott et al. 2020). the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and the University of Florida. ZH acknowledges support from NASA grant 80NSSC18K1093 and NSF grant 1715661.

REFERENCES

Aasi, J., et al. 2015, Class. Quantum Grav., 32, 074001 Bernuzzi, S., Nagar, A., Balmelli, S., Dietrich, T., & Ujevic, Abbott, B. P., et al. 2019, Phys. Rev. X, 9, 031040. M. 2014, Phys. Rev. Lett., 112, 201101 https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevX.9.031040 Duffell, P. C., Haiman, Z., MacFadyen, A. I., D’Orazio, Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2020, D. J., & Farris, B. D. 2014, ApJL, 792, L10 ApJL, 892, L3 Fung, J., Shi, J.-M., & Chiang, E. 2014, ApJ, 782, 88 Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abraham, S., et al. 2020, ApJ, Gayathri, V., Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., et al. 2020, ApJL, 896, L44. 890, L20 https://doi.org/10.3847%2F2041-8213%2Fab960f Gerosa, D., Vitale, S., & Berti, E. 2020, arXiv e-prints, Acernese, F., et al. 2015, Class. Quantum Grav., 32, 024001 arXiv:2005.04243 Alexander, T., & Hopman, C. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1861 Gondán,L., Kocsis, B., Raffai, P., & Frei, Z. 2018, ApJ, Alexander, T., & Hopman, C. 2009, The Astrophysical 860, 5 Journal, 697, 1861. https: Gupta, A., Gerosa, D., Arun, K. G., et al. 2020, PhRvD, //doi.org/10.1088%2F0004-637x%2F697%2F2%2F1861 101, 103036 Barausse, E., Morozova, V., & Rezzolla, L. 2012, ApJ, 758, Hailey, C. J., Mori, K., Bauer, F. E., et al. 2018, Nature, 63 556, 70 Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., Kocsis, B., & Márka, S. 2013, Hao, L., Strauss, M. A., Fan, X., et al. 2005, AJ, 129, 1795 PhRvL, 110, 221102 Hofmann, F., Barausse, E., & Rezzolla, L. 2016, ApJL, 825, Bartos, I., Kocsis, B., Haiman, Z., & Márka, S. 2017, ApJ, L19 835, 165 Hopman, C., & Alexander, T. 2006, ApJL, 645, L133 Baruteau, C., Cuadra, J., & Lin, D. N. C. 2011, ApJ, 726, Jiang, Y.-F., Stone, J. M., & Davis, S. W. 2019, ApJ, 880, 28 67. https://doi.org/10.3847%2F1538-4357%2Fab29ff Bellovary, J. M., Mac Low, M.-M., McKernan, B., & Ford, Kanagawa, K. D., Muto, T., Tanaka, H., et al. 2015, ApJL, K. E. S. 2016, ApJL, 819, L17 806, L15 6

Kanagawa, K. D., Tanaka, H., & Szuszkiewicz, E. 2018, Stone, N. C., Metzger, B. D., & Haiman, Z. 2017, MNRAS, ApJ, 861, 140 464, 946 Kimball, C., Talbot, C., Berry, C. P. L., et al. 2020, arXiv Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., Bartos, I., & Kocsis, B. 2020, e-prints, arXiv:2005.00023 arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2004.11914 Margalit, B., & Metzger, B. D. 2017, ApJL, 850, L19 Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., & Kocsis, B. 2019, arXiv e-prints, McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., & O’Shaughnessy, R. 2020, arXiv:1912.08218 arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2002.00046 Tanaka, H., Takeuchi, T., & Ward, W. R. 2002, ApJ, 565, McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Bellovary, J., et al. 2018, 1257 ApJ, 866, 66 Woo, J.-H., & Urry, C. M. 2002, ApJ, 579, 530 McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., Bartos, I., et al. 2019, ApJL, Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., et al. 2020, The 884, L50 Astrophysical Journal, 896, 138. Miralda-Escud´e,J., & Gould, A. 2000, ApJ, 545, 847 https://doi.org/10.3847%2F1538-4357%2Fab91b4 Most, E. R., Papenfort, L. J., Weih, L. R., & Rezzolla, L. Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., et al. 2019a, ApJ, 876, 122 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2006.14601 Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Gayathri, V., et al. 2019b, PhRvL, O’Leary, R. M., Kocsis, B., & Loeb, A. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 123, 181101 2127 Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Gayathri, V., et al. 2019, Phys. Rev. Ozel, F., & Freire, P. 2016, Annual Review of Astronomy Lett., 123, 181101. https: and Astrophysics, 54, 401. //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.181101 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023322 Yi, S.-X., Cheng, K. S., & Taam, R. E. 2018, ApJL, 859, ¨ Ozel, F., Psaltis, D., Narayan, R., & Santos Villarreal, A. L25 2012, ApJ, 757, 55 Zappa, F., Bernuzzi, S., Pannarale, F., Mapelli, M., & Paardekooper, S. J., Baruteau, C., Crida, A., & Kley, W. Giacobbo, N. 2019, Phys. Rev. Lett., 123, 041102 2010, MNRAS, 401, 1950 Zappa, F., Bernuzzi, S., Radice, D., Perego, A., & Dietrich, Safarzadeh, M., Hamers, A. S., Loeb, A., & Berger, E. T. 2018, Phys. Rev. Lett., 120, 111101 2020, ApJL, 888, L3 Zevin, M., Spera, M., Berry, C. P. L., & Kalogera, V. 2020, Safarzadeh, M., & Hotokezaka, K. 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2006.14573 arXiv:2005.06519