AG-2026.06-1191·astro-ph.HE·cross-listed: astro-ph.IMgr-qc
A Joint Optimal Search for Gravitational Waves from Resolved and Unresolved Supermassive Binary Black Holes with Pulsar Timing Arrays
Authors
- Boris Goncharov
- Gabriela Sato-Polito
- Xiaoming Bi
- Matias Zaldarriaga
Abstract
We introduce, from first principles, a joint model of the gravitational wave background (GWB) and brightest supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) sources that may be individually resolvable in Pulsar Timing Array (PTA) searches for gravitational waves. We propose the characteristic number of SMBHB sources, $N_{\rm c}$, as a detection statistic for the astrophysical origin of the GWB. We then demonstrate how the brightest SMBHBs assist in resolving $N_{\rm c}$. Applying our method to the simulated NANOGrav 15-year data, which replicates all aspects of real data's known noise, observations, and the inferred GWB power spectrum, we demonstrate direct astrophysical limits on the strain amplitude of individually resolvable SMBHBs. We find that 21 of 114 SMBHB candidates from active galactic nuclei observations are in tension with the NANOGrav's observations. In contrast, only one candidate is in tension with the NANOGrav data based on the upper limits reported in the original analysis. Constraining the Poisson-specific characteristic number of SMBHBs, $N_{\rm c}$, at ${\rm yr}^{-1}$, we outline implications for the population properties of SMBHBs. Based on our new model applied to the simulated NANOGrav data, we calculate the probability of detecting GWs from isolated SMBHB in the 15-year data to be 2\% at the ${\rm SNR}=5$ level. Our projection towards the expected NANOGrav 20-year data suggests an increase to 5\%. With this, we estimate the probability of finding an outlier with an SNR of 2 in the NANOGrav 20-year data to be $40\%$.
Submitted
16 June 2026today
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2606.18241
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.