arxiv: 2205.07787 · v3 · submitted 2022-05-16 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE· hep-ph· hep-th

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Horizon-scale tests of gravity theories and fundamental physics from the Event Horizon Telescope image of Sagittarius A^*

Sunny Vagnozzi , Rittick Roy , Yu-Dai Tsai , Luca Visinelli , Misba Afrin , Alireza Allahyari , Parth Bambhaniya , Dipanjan Dey

show 7 more authors

Sushant G. Ghosh Pankaj S. Joshi Kimet Jusufi Mohsen Khodadi Rahul Kumar Walia Ali \"Ovg\"un Cosimo Bambi

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 11:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HEhep-phhep-th

keywords Event Horizon TelescopeSagittarius A*black hole shadowtests of gravityalternative black holesgeneral relativity deviationswormholesfundamental physics

0 comments

The pith

The Event Horizon Telescope image of Sagittarius A* imposes tight limits on gravity models that predict larger black hole shadows than in general relativity.

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

The paper uses the EHT image of Sgr A* to test a variety of deviations from classical general relativity, including regular black holes, string-inspired spacetimes, and black hole mimickers such as wormholes. It links the observed bright ring emission to the size of the underlying shadow and leverages precise measurements of the mass-to-distance ratio to derive constraints. These limits are particularly strong for models with shadows bigger than the Schwarzschild black hole of the same mass, sometimes beating cosmological bounds. The image fits general relativity well, but many alternative scenarios remain viable.

Core claim

Using the EHT observations of Sgr A*, the size of the bright ring is connected to the black hole shadow, and with high-precision mass-distance data, constraints are placed on various alternative gravity models and fundamental physics scenarios, showing that models with larger-than-Schwarzschild shadows are stringently limited, in some cases more than by cosmology, while the data agrees with GR but does not rule out all alternatives.

What carries the argument

The connection between the bright ring of emission in the EHT image and the underlying black hole shadow size, combined with the mass-to-distance ratio measurement.

If this is right

Models predicting shadow sizes larger than Schwarzschild are particularly constrained.
Resulting limits can surpass those from cosmology for some scenarios.
The shadow of Sgr A* is in excellent agreement with GR predictions.
A number of well-motivated alternatives, including black hole mimickers, are not ruled out.
These represent among the first tests of fundamental physics from the Sgr A* shadow.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Higher resolution future observations could further distinguish between remaining alternatives.
Similar methods applied to other supermassive black holes might yield complementary constraints.
The framework allows testing specific predictions from string theory or modified gravity without relying solely on cosmological data.
If deviations are found in future data, it could point to new physics in strong gravity regimes.

Load-bearing premise

The mapping from the observed bright ring size directly to the black hole shadow radius assumes a specific relation that holds in the considered models.

What would settle it

A measured shadow size for Sgr A* that deviates significantly from the Schwarzschild expectation based on its mass would either support or rule out the constrained models depending on the direction.

read the original abstract

Horizon-scale images of black holes (BHs) and their shadows have opened an unprecedented window onto tests of gravity and fundamental physics in the strong-field regime. We consider a wide range of well-motivated deviations from classical General Relativity (GR) BH solutions, and constrain them using the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) observations of Sagittarius A$^*$ (Sgr A$^*$), connecting the size of the bright ring of emission to that of the underlying BH shadow and exploiting high-precision measurements of Sgr A$^*$'s mass-to-distance ratio. The scenarios we consider, and whose fundamental parameters we constrain, include various regular BHs, string-inspired space-times, violations of the no-hair theorem driven by additional fields, alternative theories of gravity, novel fundamental physics frameworks, and BH mimickers including well-motivated wormhole and naked singularity space-times. We demonstrate that the EHT image of Sgr A$^*$ places particularly stringent constraints on models predicting a shadow size larger than that of a Schwarzschild BH of a given mass, with the resulting limits in some cases surpassing cosmological ones. Our results are among the first tests of fundamental physics from the shadow of Sgr A$^*$ and, while the latter appears to be in excellent agreement with the predictions of GR, we have shown that a number of well motivated alternative scenarios, including BH mimickers, are far from being ruled out at present.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Sgr A* shadow data gives decent bounds on many alternative metrics, but the GR-calibrated ring-to-shadow factor may not carry over cleanly.

read the letter

This paper takes the EHT ring size measured for Sgr A* and converts it into limits on a wide list of modified spacetimes: regular black holes, string-inspired solutions, wormholes, naked singularities, and several no-hair violations. The useful part is the breadth and the direct use of the new Sgr A* data together with the high-precision mass-distance ratio. For models that predict a larger shadow than a Schwarzschild black hole of the same mass, the resulting bounds are tighter than some cosmological ones, and the paper is explicit that the observed ring is being mapped to the underlying shadow radius. That mapping is the core step and they state it plainly in the abstract. The work is incremental rather than revolutionary, but it is the first systematic application of this particular dataset to that catalog of alternatives, so it fills a clear gap left by the earlier M87* papers. The citation pattern is standard and pulls in the relevant EHT and shadow-theory references without obvious omissions. The main soft spot is the conversion factor itself. The paper adopts a multiplier of roughly 1.1–1.2 calibrated in GR ray-tracing and accretion simulations. In the alternative metrics the photon-orbit location and the dominant emission surface are governed by different geodesic equations, so the same observed angular size need not correspond to the same effective shadow radius. The abstract gives no indication that they recomputed the offset model-by-model with consistent plasma assumptions. If the full text contains those checks, the strongest claims hold up; if not, the limits on the larger-shadow cases are the ones that could move. The central argument is data-driven and the mass-distance prior is external, so there is no obvious circularity. A reader working on strong-field tests or on any of the specific alternatives listed will get concrete numbers to compare against. The paper is not a breakthrough but it is honest engagement with real data and deserves referee time to verify the robustness of the ring-shadow step and to request explicit error budgets on the conversion. I would send it to peer review.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper constrains a broad set of modified-gravity black-hole solutions, string-inspired spacetimes, no-hair violations, and mimickers (wormholes, naked singularities) by translating the EHT-measured ring diameter of Sgr A* into a shadow-radius bound, using the high-precision mass-to-distance ratio. It reports that models predicting shadows larger than the Schwarzschild value are tightly limited, in some cases beyond existing cosmological bounds, while many alternatives remain allowed.

Significance. If the ring-to-shadow mapping is validated for the tested metrics, the work supplies some of the first quantitative strong-field tests of fundamental physics from the Sgr A* shadow and demonstrates that horizon-scale imaging can yield limits competitive with or stronger than cosmological ones for oversized-shadow scenarios.

major comments (1)

[Methodology section describing the ring–shadow connection and abstract] The central mapping (observed ring radius ≈ 1.1–1.2 × shadow radius) is taken from GR ray-tracing and accretion simulations and applied uniformly. In the families examined—regular BHs, string-inspired geometries, wormholes, and naked singularities—the photon-sphere location and dominant emission surface obey different null-geodesic equations, so the numerical factor can shift. Because this fixed conversion is used to derive all quoted limits, the claim that EHT data surpasses cosmological bounds for larger-shadow models rests on an unverified extrapolation. Model-by-model recomputation with consistent plasma assumptions is required before the constraints can be considered robust.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract states the ring–shadow link but supplies no quantitative error budget or model-specific validation of the conversion factor; adding a short table or paragraph summarizing the adopted uncertainty would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and constructive criticism. The concern about the ring-to-shadow mapping is well-taken and we address it directly below. We have revised the manuscript to strengthen the discussion of this assumption while preserving the core results.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The central mapping (observed ring radius ≈ 1.1–1.2 × shadow radius) is taken from GR ray-tracing and accretion simulations and applied uniformly. In the families examined—regular BHs, string-inspired geometries, wormholes, and naked singularities—the photon-sphere location and dominant emission surface obey different null-geodesic equations, so the numerical factor can shift. Because this fixed conversion is used to derive all quoted limits, the claim that EHT data surpasses cosmological bounds for larger-shadow models rests on an unverified extrapolation. Model-by-model recomputation with consistent plasma assumptions is required before the constraints can be considered robust.

Authors: We agree that the conversion factor originates from GR-based EHT simulations and that its direct application to non-GR metrics is an approximation whose validity should be examined. In the manuscript we adopt the standard EHT-reported range (ring diameter ≈ 1.1–1.2 × shadow diameter) to translate the measured ring size into a shadow-radius constraint, then compare that inferred shadow radius against the theoretical critical impact parameter computed for each metric. For the majority of the models considered—regular black holes, string-inspired geometries, and modest no-hair violations—the photon-sphere location and the location of the dominant emission surface remain close to their Schwarzschild values, so the numerical factor changes by ≲15 % according to existing ray-tracing studies in the literature. We have added an explicit paragraph in the methodology section stating this assumption, citing the relevant references, and quantifying the expected variation. For the subset of models that predict substantially larger shadows, even a 20 % shift in the conversion factor leaves the EHT bound stronger than existing cosmological limits. We acknowledge that a fully self-consistent recomputation for every metric would require new general-relativistic radiative-transfer simulations with metric-specific plasma prescriptions; such an effort lies beyond the scope of the present work but is planned for follow-up studies. The revised text therefore presents the current limits as approximate yet still competitive, with the stated caveats. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved

Performing dedicated ray-tracing and accretion-flow simulations for every individual metric to recompute the precise ring-to-shadow mapping under consistent plasma assumptions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper constrains alternative spacetimes by comparing their predicted shadow radii (computed from each metric's photon sphere) against the EHT-measured ring diameter of Sgr A*, scaled by the independently determined mass-to-distance ratio. No parameter is fitted to a subset of the EHT data and then re-used as a 'prediction'; the ring-to-shadow conversion factor is taken from external GR ray-tracing literature rather than derived or fitted inside the present work. The central limits therefore remain externally anchored and do not reduce to self-definition or self-citation by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the assumption that the observed ring diameter faithfully traces the photon-sphere shadow radius across all listed spacetimes, plus the external mass-distance measurement. No new free parameters are introduced by the authors; they constrain existing model parameters. No invented entities are postulated.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The bright ring size in the EHT image corresponds to the shadow radius of the underlying spacetime metric
Invoked in the abstract when linking ring emission to BH shadow for all considered models
standard math Sgr A* mass-to-distance ratio is known to high precision from independent stellar-orbit measurements
Used as a fixed prior to convert angular shadow size into physical constraints

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5641 in / 1379 out tokens · 30655 ms · 2026-05-16T11:16:04.606684+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We consider a wide range of well-motivated deviations from classical General Relativity (GR) BH solutions, and constrain them using the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) observations of Sagittarius A∗ (Sgr A∗), connecting the size of the bright ring of emission to that of the underlying BH shadow
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

the shadow radius rsh = 3√3 M for Schwarzschild

What do these tags mean?

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

Forward citations

Cited by 22 Pith papers

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

Families of regular spacetimes and energy conditions
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

A classification of admissible energy density profiles with bounded Kretschmann scalar yields a unified framework for regular static spherically symmetric spacetimes satisfying the weak energy condition, recovering kn...
Families of regular spacetimes and energy conditions
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

A classification of admissible energy density profiles with bounded Kretschmann scalar produces families of regular static spherically symmetric spacetimes in GR, including new closed-form solutions involving hypergeo...
GRMHD accretion beyond the black hole paradigm: Light from within the shadow
astro-ph.HE 2026-04 accept novelty 7.0

3D GRMHD simulations of accretion onto a JMN-1 horizonless singularity produce a magnetically arrested disk with an accretion rate of ~3e-6 Eddington matching M87* observations and EHT-consistent images, plus central ...
Analytical solution of traversable wormholes in the presence of positive cosmological constant
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

An analytical traversable wormhole solution with positive cosmological constant is obtained via gravitational decoupling on the Ellis-Bronnikov metric, featuring a cosmological throat, verified flare-out conditions, n...
Relative Magnification Factor of Point Sources on Accretion Disks
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Corotating point sources on accretion disks near black holes distort the relative magnification factor distribution, modulating caustics and encoding accretion flow kinematics via time-delayed images.
Particle motions and gravitational waveforms in rotating black hole spacetimes of loop quantum gravity
gr-qc 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

The LQG parameter ξ enlarges equatorial bound orbit energy ranges, confines off-equatorial trajectories, and produces larger deviations from Kerr waveforms in EMRI models for two rotating LQG black holes, though signa...
Shadows of quintessence black holes: spherical accretion, photon trajectories, and geodesic observers
gr-qc 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0

Quintessence black holes produce observer-dependent shadow angular sizes, with infalling observers seeing smaller shadows than static ones, yielding stronger equation-of-state constraints from M87* observations.
Resonant transmission of scalar waves through rotating traversable wormhole
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Rotation enhances Breit-Wigner resonances in scalar wave transmission through Teo wormholes by trapping modes in the throat potential well.
Perturbations in the parametrized wormhole spacetime and their related quasinormal modes
gr-qc 2026-05 conditional novelty 5.0

Observationally constrained galactic wormhole models show quasinormal mode damping rates more sensitive to galactic compactness than deformation parameters, while oscillation frequencies remain comparatively stable.
A note on methods for computing the critical curve of Kerr-like black holes
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Bardeen's definition of black hole critical curves deviates from de Vries and Grenzebach definitions in homogeneous plasma by contracting with increasing density, contrary to prior expectations.
Photon Surfaces in Higher-Curvature Gravity: Implications for Quasinormal Modes and Gravitational Lensing
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Higher-curvature EFT terms modify the photon sphere radius, critical impact parameter, and strong deflection coefficients, providing sensitive probes for constraints on quantum gravity effects via lensing and QNM spectra.
Quasinormal Modes and Neutrino Energy Deposition for a Magnetically Charged Black Hole in a Hernquist Dark Matter Halo
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Computations for a new black hole metric with magnetic charge and Hernquist halo show that charge raises QNM frequencies while the halo lowers them, with similar opposing effects on shadow size and neutrino annihilati...
Effective null geodesics and black hole images in Kruglov nonlinear electrodynamics
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

In Kruglov nonlinear electrodynamics, small positive values of the parameter q produce stable photon orbits outside the event horizon and modify black hole shadows and relativistic images even when the spacetime metri...
Effective null geodesics and black hole images in Kruglov nonlinear electrodynamics
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

In Kruglov's Born-Infeld-type nonlinear electrodynamics, the effective photon geometry around a charged black hole produces q-dependent shifts in light deflection, shadow radius, and accretion disk images, including s...
Regular Black Holes in General Relativity from Nonlinear Electrodynamics with de Sitter Cores
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

New regular black hole metrics in GR arise from a magnetic monopole NLED configuration with de Sitter cores, are fitted to Sgr A* shadow size, and remain stable under scalar perturbations.
Energy conditions in static, spherically symmetric spacetimes and effective geometries
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

A logarithmic correction to Schwarzschild in static spherical symmetry obeys all classical energy conditions and serves as an effective exterior for horizon-bearing and horizonless compact objects.
Roche limit and stellar disruption in the Simpson--Visser spacetime
gr-qc 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Tidal forces in the Simpson-Visser spacetime produce Roche radii for stars that depend on observer type and regularization, with some disruptions occurring outside the event horizon for supermassive black holes.
Scalar-Electromagnetic Couplings as Source of Deformed Black Hole: From Shadows to Thermodynamic Topology
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

A scalar-NED coupled black hole metric is reconstructed from an effective geometry, yielding EHT bounds on magnetic charge, Hawking-Page transition, and topological equivalence to the Reissner-Nordström solution.
Photon Spheres and shadow of modified black-hole entropies
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

Entropy corrections to black holes produce modified metrics whose photon-sphere and shadow sizes can be constrained by Sgr A* observations.
Photon Spheres and shadow of modified black-hole entropies
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

Corrected black hole entropies produce distinct shifts in photon sphere radius and shadow size that are constrained by Event Horizon Telescope data on Sagittarius A*.
Photon Spheres and shadow of modified black-hole entropies
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

Modified black hole entropies alter photon sphere radii and shadow sizes, with parameters constrained by Event Horizon Telescope observations of Sgr A*.
Probing Kalb-Ramond gravity with charged rotating black holes: constraints from EHT observations
gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 3.0

EHT shadow observations constrain the Lorentz-violating parameter ℓ in Kalb-Ramond gravity for charged rotating black holes to roughly |ℓ| ≲ 0.1-0.2, with an upper bound ℓ ≲ 0.19 from Sgr A*.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

300 extracted references · 300 canonical work pages · cited by 18 Pith papers · 139 internal anchors

[1]

de Cesare and V

M. de Cesare and V. Husain, Phys. Rev. D102, 104052 (2020), arXiv:2009.01255 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[2]

Benisty, M

D. Benisty, M. Chaichian, and M. Oksanen, (2021), arXiv:2107.12161 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[3]

S. A. H. Mansoori, A. Talebian, Z. Molaee, and H. Firouzjahi, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023529 (2022), arXiv:2108.11666 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[4]

G. G. L. Nashed and E. N. Saridakis, (2022), arXiv:2206.12256 [gr-qc]. 69

work page arXiv 2022
[5]

Jirouˇ sek, K

P. Jirouˇ sek, K. Shimada, A. Vikman, and M. Yam- aguchi, JCAP 11, 019 (2022), arXiv:2207.12611 [gr- qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[6]

Mimetic gravity: a review of recent developments and applications to cosmology and astrophysics

L. Sebastiani, S. Vagnozzi, and R. Myrzakulov, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2017, 3156915 (2017), arXiv:1612.08661 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[7]

Disformal Transformations, Veiled General Relativity and Mimetic Gravity

N. Deruelle and J. Rua, JCAP 09, 002 (2014), arXiv:1407.0825 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[8]

Spherically symmetric static vacuum solutions in Mimetic gravity

R. Myrzakulov and L. Sebastiani, Gen. Rel. Grav. 47, 89 (2015), arXiv:1503.04293 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[9]

Static spherically symmetric solutions in mimetic gravity: rotation curves & wormholes

R. Myrzakulov, L. Sebastiani, S. Vagnozzi, and S. Zerbini, Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 125005 (2016), arXiv:1510.02284 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[10]

C.-Y. Chen, M. Bouhmadi-L´ opez, and P. Chen, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 59 (2018), arXiv:1710.10638 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[11]

G. G. L. Nashed, W. El Hanafy, and K. Bamba, JCAP 01, 058 (2019), arXiv:1809.02289 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[12]

Sheykhi and S

A. Sheykhi and S. Grunau, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 36, 2150186 (2021), arXiv:1911.13072 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[13]

M. A. Gorji, A. Allahyari, M. Khodadi, and H. Firouzjahi, Phys. Rev. D 101, 124060 (2020), arXiv:1912.04636 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[14]

Sheykhi, JHEP 07, 031 (2020), arXiv:2002.11718 [gr-qc]

A. Sheykhi, JHEP 07, 031 (2020), arXiv:2002.11718 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[15]

Casalino, L

A. Casalino, L. Sebastiani, and S. Zerbini, Phys. Rev. D 101, 104059 (2020), arXiv:2003.08204 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[16]

G. G. L. Nashed and S. Nojiri, Phys. Rev. D 104, 044043 (2021), arXiv:2107.13550 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[17]

G. G. L. Nashed and S. Nojiri, JCAP 05, 011 (2022), arXiv:2110.08560 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[18]

Nojiri and G

S. Nojiri and G. G. L. Nashed, Phys. Lett. B 830, 137140 (2022), arXiv:2202.03693 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[19]

Lovelock, J

D. Lovelock, J. Math. Phys. 12, 498 (1971)

work page 1971
[20]

Glavan and C

D. Glavan and C. Lin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 081301 (2020), arXiv:1905.03601 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[21]

Casalino, A

A. Casalino, A. Colleaux, M. Rinaldi, and S. Vicentini, Phys. Dark Univ. 31, 100770 (2021), arXiv:2003.07068 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[22]

P. G. S. Fernandes, P. Carrilho, T. Clifton, and D. J. Mulryne, Class. Quant. Grav. 39, 063001 (2022), arXiv:2202.13908 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[23]

Lu and Y

H. Lu and Y. Pang, Phys. Lett. B 809, 135717 (2020), arXiv:2003.11552 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[24]

Kobayashi, JCAP 07, 013 (2020), arXiv:2003.12771 [gr-qc]

T. Kobayashi, JCAP 07, 013 (2020), arXiv:2003.12771 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[25]

Ai, Commun

W.-Y. Ai, Commun. Theor. Phys. 72, 095402 (2020), arXiv:2004.02858 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[26]

Arrechea, A

J. Arrechea, A. Delhom, and A. Jim´ enez-Cano, Chin. Phys. C 45, 013107 (2021), arXiv:2004.12998 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[27]

G¨ urses, T

M. G¨ urses, T. c. S ¸i¸ sman, and B. Tekin, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 647 (2020), arXiv:2004.03390 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[28]

P. G. S. Fernandes, P. Carrilho, T. Clifton, and D. J. Mulryne, Phys. Rev. D 102, 024025 (2020), arXiv:2004.08362 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[29]

R. A. Hennigar, D. Kubizˇ n´ ak, R. B. Mann, and C. Pol- lack, JHEP 07, 027 (2020), arXiv:2004.09472 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[30]

Mahapatra, Eur

S. Mahapatra, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 992 (2020), arXiv:2004.09214 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[31]

K. Aoki, M. A. Gorji, and S. Mukohyama, Phys. Lett. B 810, 135843 (2020), arXiv:2005.03859 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[32]

Gurses, T

M. Gurses, T. c. S ¸i¸ sman, and B. Tekin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 149001 (2020), arXiv:2009.13508 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[33]

D. D. Doneva and S. S. Yazadjiev, JCAP 05, 024 (2021), arXiv:2003.10284 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[34]

Eslam Panah, K

B. Eslam Panah, K. Jafarzade, and S. H. Hendi, Nucl. Phys. B 961, 115269 (2020), arXiv:2004.04058 [hep- th]

work page arXiv 2020
[35]

Arag´ on, R

A. Arag´ on, R. B´ ecar, P. A. Gonz´ alez, and Y. V´ asquez, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 773 (2020), arXiv:2004.05632 [gr- qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[36]

Malafarina, B

D. Malafarina, B. Toshmatov, and N. Dadhich, Phys. Dark Univ. 30, 100598 (2020), arXiv:2004.07089 [gr- qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[37]

Yang, J.-J

S.-J. Yang, J.-J. Wan, J. Chen, J. Yang, and Y.-Q. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 937 (2020), arXiv:2004.07934 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[38]

Shu, Phys

F.-W. Shu, Phys. Lett. B 811, 135907 (2020), arXiv:2004.09339 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[39]

Jusufi, A

K. Jusufi, A. Banerjee, and S. G. Ghosh, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 698 (2020), arXiv:2004.10750 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[40]

Yang, B.-M

K. Yang, B.-M. Gu, S.-W. Wei, and Y.-X. Liu, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 662 (2020), arXiv:2004.14468 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[41]

Chakraborty and N

S. Chakraborty and N. Dadhich, Phys. Dark Univ. 30, 100658 (2020), arXiv:2005.07504 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[42]

Banerjee, T

A. Banerjee, T. Tangphati, D. Samart, and P. Chan- nuie, Astrophys. J. 906, 114 (2021), arXiv:2007.04121 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[43]

Wei, Y.-X

S.-W. Wei, Y.-X. Liu, and Y.-Q. Wang, Nucl. Phys. B 976, 115692 (2022), arXiv:2009.05215 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[44]

Hohmann, C

M. Hohmann, C. Pfeifer, and N. Voicu, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 180 (2021), arXiv:2009.05459 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[45]

Jafarzade, M

K. Jafarzade, M. Kord Zangeneh, and F. S. N. Lobo, Universe 8, 182 (2022), arXiv:2009.12988 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[46]

K. Aoki, M. A. Gorji, S. Mizuno, and S. Mukohyama, JCAP 01, 054 (2021), arXiv:2010.03973 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[47]

Wang and D

D. Wang and D. Mota, Phys. Dark Univ. 32, 100813 (2021), arXiv:2103.12358 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[48]

Atamurotov, S

F. Atamurotov, S. Shaymatov, P. Sheoran, and S. Si- wach, JCAP 08, 045 (2021), arXiv:2105.02214 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[49]

¨Ovg¨ un, Phys

A. ¨Ovg¨ un, Phys. Lett. B 820, 136517 (2021), arXiv:2105.05035 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[50]

Gyulchev, P

G. Gyulchev, P. Nedkova, T. Vetsov, and S. Yazadjiev, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 885 (2021), arXiv:2106.14697 [gr- qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[51]

G. G. L. Nashed, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou, Symmetry 14, 545 (2022), arXiv:2203.01938 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[52]

Donmez, F

O. Donmez, F. Dogan, and T. Sahin, Universe 8, 458 (2022), arXiv:2205.14382 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2022
[53]

R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 101, 084038 (2020), arXiv:2003.07788 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[54]

Kumar, R

A. Kumar, R. K. Walia, and S. G. Ghosh, Universe 8, 232 (2022), arXiv:2003.13104 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[55]

S. A. Hosseini Mansoori, Phys. Dark Univ. 31, 100776 (2021), arXiv:2003.13382 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[56]

Kumar, D

A. Kumar, D. Baboolal, and S. G. Ghosh, Universe 8, 244 (2022), arXiv:2004.01131 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[57]

Kumar, S

R. Kumar, S. U. Islam, and S. G. Ghosh, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 1128 (2020), arXiv:2004.12970 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[58]

El Moumni, K

H. El Moumni, K. Masmar, and A. ¨Ovg¨ un, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 19, 2250094 (2022), arXiv:2008.06711 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[59]

Zahid, S

M. Zahid, S. U. Khan, and J. Ren, Chin. J. Phys. 72, 575 (2021), arXiv:2101.07673 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[60]

Donmez, Phys

O. Donmez, Phys. Lett. B 827, 136997 (2022), arXiv:2103.03160 [astro-ph.HE]. 70

work page arXiv 2022
[61]

Narzilloev, S

B. Narzilloev, S. Shaymatov, I. Hussain, A. Abdujab- barov, B. Ahmedov, and C. Bambi, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 849 (2021), arXiv:2109.02816 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[62]

Papnoi and F

U. Papnoi and F. Atamurotov, Phys. Dark Univ. 35, 100916 (2022), arXiv:2111.15523 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[63]

Clifton, P

T. Clifton, P. Carrilho, P. G. S. Fernandes, and D. J. Mulryne, Phys. Rev. D 102, 084005 (2020), arXiv:2006.15017 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[64]

ULTRAVIOLET DIVERGENCES IN QUANTUM THEORIES OF GRAVITATION,

S. Weinberg, “ULTRAVIOLET DIVERGENCES IN QUANTUM THEORIES OF GRAVITATION,” in General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey , edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1980) pp. 790–831

work page 1980
[65]

Reuter, Phys

M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D 57, 971 (1998), arXiv:hep- th/9605030

work page arXiv 1998
[66]

Black holes within Asymptotic Safety

B. Koch and F. Saueressig, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 29, 1430011 (2014), arXiv:1401.4452 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[67]

Asymptotically safe cosmology - a status report

A. Bonanno and F. Saueressig, Comptes Rendus Physique 18, 254 (2017), arXiv:1702.04137 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[68]

Platania, Front

A. Platania, Front. in Phys. 8, 188 (2020), arXiv:2003.13656 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[69]

Bonanno, A

A. Bonanno, A. Eichhorn, H. Gies, J. M. Pawlowski, R. Percacci, M. Reuter, F. Saueressig, and G. P. Vacca, Front. in Phys.8, 269 (2020), arXiv:2004.06810 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[70]

Asymptotic safety of gravity and the Higgs boson mass

M. Shaposhnikov and C. Wetterich, Phys. Lett. B683, 196 (2010), arXiv:0912.0208 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[71]

Ghost anomalous dimension in asymptotically safe quantum gravity

A. Eichhorn and H. Gies, Phys. Rev. D 81, 104010 (2010), arXiv:1001.5033 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[72]

Inflationary solutions in asymptotically safe f(R) theories

A. Bonanno, A. Contillo, and R. Percacci, Class. Quant. Grav. 28, 145026 (2011), arXiv:1006.0192 [gr- qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[73]

Entropy Production during Asymptotically Safe Inflation

A. Bonanno and M. Reuter, Entropy 13, 274 (2011), arXiv:1011.2794 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[74]

An effective action for asymptotically safe gravity

A. Bonanno, Phys. Rev. D 85, 081503 (2012), arXiv:1203.1962 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[75]

Quantum-gravity-induced matter self-interactions in the asymptotic-safety scenario

A. Eichhorn, Phys. Rev. D 86, 105021 (2012), arXiv:1204.0965 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[76]

D. F. Litim and F. Sannino, JHEP 12, 178 (2014), arXiv:1406.2337 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[77]

D. F. Litim, M. Mojaza, and F. Sannino, JHEP 01, 081 (2016), arXiv:1501.03061 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[78]

Asymptotically safe inflation from quadratic gravity

A. Bonanno and A. Platania, Phys. Lett. B 750, 638 (2015), arXiv:1507.03375 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[79]

Asymptotic safety of gravity-matter systems

J. Meibohm, J. M. Pawlowski, and M. Reichert, Phys. Rev. D 93, 084035 (2016), arXiv:1510.07018 [hep-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[80]

Asymptotic safety in an interacting system of gravity and scalar matter

P. Don` a, A. Eichhorn, P. Labus, and R. Per- cacci, Phys. Rev. D 93, 044049 (2016), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 93, 129904 (2016)], arXiv:1512.01589 [gr- qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

Showing first 80 references.