Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Collapse Scenario and Final State of Evaporation for Schwarzschild Black Hole in Dimensionally-Reduced Model of Dilaton Gravity

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper derives a complete evaporation scenario for a Schwarzschild black hole in a dimensionally reduced dilaton-gravity model, ending in Minkowski spacetime with a thunderpop at a finite endpoint.

desk verdict Serious perturbative evaporation scenario in the DREH model; the Minkowski end-state claim is plausible but rests on an assumed ansatz at a point where the expansion is uncontrolled. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.09946 v1 pith:KCEIFNBF submitted 2025-06-11 hep-th gr-qc

Voja Radovanović , Stefan {DJ}or{j̣ević This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qc
keywords dilatongravityblackholeevaporationdimensionalreductionPolyakov-Liouvilleactionend-stategeometryMinkowskivacuumthunderpopback-reaction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that a Schwarzschild black hole in the dimensionally reduced Einstein-Hilbert (DREH) dilaton-gravity model evaporates completely, with a finite endpoint at which the shrinking horizon meets the singularity and a shockwave (a thunderpop) is emitted. The authors solve the semiclassical field equations to first order in $\varepsilon = \hbar G/12\pi$, starting from Minkowski initial data and a collapsing shockwave. They find that the apparent horizon shrinks monotonically, and that along the $\hat{x} = \hat{x}_E$ hypersurface the metric can be matched continuously to a static end-state geometry that, within first order, is Minkowski spacetime. The upshot is a concrete evaporation scenario: the evaporation time scales as $M^3$, and the radiated energy equals the initial mass minus a remnant of order $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$. This matters because it offers a complete end-of-evaporation picture in a model derived from ordinary four-dimensional gravity, rather than only an eternal black-hole solution.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the first-order perturbative solution of the quantum-corrected field equations, built on the one-loop trace-anomaly effective action (the Polyakov-Liouville action) of a massless scalar field. In the conformal gauge the fields are the dilaton $x = \phi/(\lambda a)$ and the conformal factor $\rho$, both expanded in $\varepsilon = \hbar G/12\pi$, with the classical background fixed by null coordinates adapted to the Minkowski initial state. The technical core is the transcendental equation $e^{\hat{x}}(\hat{x}-1) = \delta e^x(x-1)$ relating the interior coordinate $\hat{x}$ to the exterior $x$ and the time coordinate $\delta = e^{-(\sigma^+ - \sigma^+_0)/(2a)}$. The paper solves this equation in uniformly convergent functional series, and uses the resulting functions $S_n(x)$ to obtain explicit formulas for the metric, the apparent horizon, the singularity line, and the endpoint. Near the endpoint a rescaled coordinate $y = x/\tilde{a}$, $\tilde{a} = 1 + \frac{\varepsilon}{4(\lambda a)^2}\ln\delta$, together with a function $J(y)$ that absorbs the divergent parts, makes the solution regular at $x = 1 + O(\varepsilon)$ and supplies the matching data for the Minkowski ansatz.

What would settle it

Integrate the full quantum-corrected field equations numerically (or with a non-perturbative method) through the endpoint $\delta_E = \exp[-\frac{4(\lambda a)^2}{\varepsilon}(1-\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{\lambda a})]$ with the same initial shockwave data, and compare the future geometry with $F_+F_-e^{2\rho} = -1$, $\phi = \frac{\lambda}{2}(\hat\sigma^+_f - \hat\sigma^-)$. In particular, check whether $\partial_-\phi_<$ and $\partial_-\rho_<$ from the numerical solution match the paper's matched values $ -\frac{\lambda}{2F_-}\bigl(1-\frac{\lambda\hat a_E}{\sqrt{\phi^2-\varepsilon}}\bigr)$ and $-\frac{1}{2}\partial_-\ln F_- - \frac{\lambda}{4F_-}\frac{\lambda\hat a_E}{\phi^2}$; a mismatch beyond first order would falsify the claimed Minkowski end-state.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the DREH black hole has a finite evaporation endpoint: the apparent horizon $x_{\mathrm{AH}} = 1 + \frac{\varepsilon}{4(\lambda a)^2}(2+\ln\delta)$ and the quantum-corrected singularity $x_S = \sqrt{\varepsilon}/(\lambda a)$ cross at $\delta_E = \exp[-\frac{4(\lambda a)^2}{\varepsilon}(1-\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{\lambda a})]$, which translates into an evaporation time whose leading term scales as $M^3$. At that crossing a shockwave is produced, and the geometry on the future side can be matched to the ansatz $F_+F_-e^{2\rho} = -1$, $\phi = \frac{\lambda}{2}(\hat{\sigma}^+_f - \hat{\sigma}^-)$, which is Minkowski spacetime to first order in $\varepsilon$. The radiated energy integrated up to the endpoint is $E_{\mathrm{rad}} = Mc^2\bigl[1 - \sqrt{\frac{\hbar c}{12\pi M^2 G_N^{(4)}}} + \dots\bigr]$, so nearly all of the initial mass is radiated and a $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ remnant remains. The paper is explicit that the perturbative expansion breaks down at the endpoint because $\varepsilon\ln\delta_E$ is of order one, so the Minkowski end-state is established by a consistency check of the matching ansatz rather than by a convergent expansion there.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the first-order perturbative matching at the evaporation endpoint remains trustworthy, even though the paper itself notes that the perturbative expansion breaks down there because $\varepsilon\ln\delta_E$ is of order one; the Minkowski end-state is verified only by consistency of an ansatz in that regime.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The shrinking horizon and the quantum-corrected singularity intersect at a finite $\sigma^+$, giving a finite evaporation time whose leading term is $768\pi M^3 G^2/(\hbar\lambda^4)$.
  • The total radiated energy is the initial mass minus a $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ remnant, with the shockwave carrying exactly the difference between the initial black-hole mass and the radiated energy.
  • The end-state geometry is Minkowski spacetime to first order in $\varepsilon$, and the quantum state there is the corresponding vacuum, so the evolution ends in flat space rather than a naked singularity or a massive remnant.
  • The singularity is no longer at $x = 0$; quantum back-reaction shifts it to $x_S = \sqrt{\varepsilon}/(\lambda a)$, a scale of order the Planck length when constants are restored.
  • The evaporation scenario follows the same pattern as exactly solvable two-dimensional dilaton-gravity models: a thunderpop at the endpoint and a flat end-state geometry.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Going beyond the paper, the explicit evaporating metric constructed here is the natural input for a Page-curve computation for a Schwarzschild-like black hole; the paper itself advertises this as the next step.
  • If the endpoint matching survives a non-perturbative or numerical check of the field equations, the DREH model would provide a reduction-from-four-dimensions example of complete evaporation that is not an artifact of an exactly solvable ansatz.
  • The first-order correction to the end-state metric (the $\lambda\hat{a}_E$ term) cannot be fixed by this perturbative expansion; the paper concedes it could even be zero, so the honest summary is that the Minkowski end-state is plausible but unproven beyond leading order.
  • One testable extension is to run a numerical simulation of the full semiclassical equations through $\delta_E$ and check whether the matching conditions $Q' = \lambda\hat{a}_E$ and $Q' + \lambda a_0 = 0$ continue to hold when higher-order terms are included.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the (1+1)-dimensional DREH dilaton-gravity model obtained by spherical dimensional reduction of the Einstein-Hilbert action. It constructs a classical collapse solution with an infalling shockwave, adds the Polyakov-Liouville one-loop effective action, and solves the backreacted field equations perturbatively to first order in epsilon = hbar G/(12 pi). The resulting evaporating-black-hole solution is used to locate the apparent horizon, the quantum-corrected singularity, the endpoint of evaporation, and the radiated energy. The paper's central claim is that at the endpoint the geometry can be continuously matched to a static end-state geometry which, within first-order perturbation theory, is Minkowski space-time, with a thunderpop shockwave, an evaporation time scaling as M^3, and radiated energy equal to the initial mass up to O(sqrt(epsilon)) remnant terms.

Significance. If the end-state claim is correct, the DREH model would provide one of the few complete, Schwarzschild-like two-dimensional evaporation scenarios, complementing the RST and BPP models and giving a concrete prediction for the evaporation time and radiated energy. The paper contains substantial nontrivial technical work: an explicit solution of the transcendental equation relating dilaton and coordinates with uniform-convergence proofs in Appendix B, a systematic first-order backreacted metric, and a careful treatment of asymptotically flat coordinates. The authors are also candid that the perturbative expansion breaks down at the endpoint. However, the central end-state conclusion rests on an assumed Minkowski ansatz in precisely that broken regime, so the significance is conditional on obtaining non-perturbative or higher-order control of the endpoint matching.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section V, after Eq. (163), and Section V.C] The endpoint is located at delta_E = exp[-4(lambda a)^2/epsilon (1 - sqrt(epsilon)/(lambda a))], so epsilon tilde ln delta_E = -4 + O(sqrt(epsilon tilde)), where epsilon tilde = epsilon/(lambda a)^2. The paper itself states after Eq. (163) that the perturbative approach breaks down at this point. Nevertheless, the values lambda a_hat_E = O(sqrt(epsilon)), the limit lambda a_hat_E -> 0, and the matching constants Q' = lambda a_hat_E and lambda a_0 = -Q' are all extracted from first-order expressions evaluated at delta = delta_E. A second-order contribution to F(x_hat_E) of order 1/epsilon tilde, which is not excluded by anything shown, would shift lambda a_hat_E by O(1) and could change the shockwave mass and the claimed Minkowski end-state. This is load-bearing because the end-state conclusion is the paper's central claim.
  2. [Section V.C, Eq. (194)] The final Minkowski geometry is assumed rather than derived. The matching calculation starts by imposing the ansatz F_+ F_- e^{2 rho} = -1 and phi = (lambda/2)(sigma_+^f - sigma_-), then solves for Q' and lambda a_0 from the first-order equations. A consistency check of an assumed ansatz cannot, by itself, establish that the matching conditions force the end-state to be Minkowski; the same procedure would 'succeed' for any consistent ansatz. To support the central claim, the authors need either to prove uniqueness of the ansatz from the matching conditions or to present the end-state identification explicitly as a conjecture or consistency check rather than as a derivation.
  3. [Section V.C, Eqs. (187)-(188), (197)] The treatment of lambda a_hat_E is parametrically inconsistent. lambda a_hat_E is O(sqrt(epsilon)), which is parametrically larger than the O(epsilon) corrections retained in first-order perturbation theory, yet it is set to zero 'within the first order' to obtain flat space. If lambda a_hat_E is nonzero at order sqrt(epsilon), Eq. (187) is not the Minkowski metric, and the identification with the vacuum |0, sigma_hat_f> requires a separate argument. In addition, Eq. (197) with a_f = 0 gives lambda a_0 = lambda a_rad - lambda a; using Eq. (171), this quantity is negative, while the text identifies lambda a_0 with the positive difference between the initial mass and the radiated energy. Please clarify the sign convention for lambda a_0 or correct the energy-balance equation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II] The sentence 'the set of quations that we will solve' contains a typo; it should read 'equations'.
  2. [Section IV.B] The constant c_1 = 7 is introduced abruptly after Eq. (108); it would help the reader if the normalization condition S_1(1) = 0 and the resulting value c_1 = 7 were stated explicitly before being used.
  3. [Appendix B] Lemma B.6 and Lemma B.11 are stated without proof; since they are used in the uniform-convergence arguments, a proof or a reference for the identities P_n(1) = (n+1)^n and Q_{n-1}(1) = (n-1)! sum_{k=0}^{n-1} n^k/k! should be provided.
  4. [Appendix A] The term 'Schwartz derivative' should be 'Schwarzian derivative', and the notation should be defined consistently with Eq. (A6).
  5. [Figures 1 and 2] The Penrose diagrams would be easier to use if the regions I, II, III, the infalling shockwave, and the evaporation endpoint E were explicitly labeled in the captions and in the figures.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The claimed Minkowski end-state is assumed from the outset in Eq. (194) and then verified by matching constants; the endpoint conclusion is a consistency check, not a derivation.

  1. self definitional [Section V.C, Eqs. (194)-(196) and (197)]
    "Similarly to the case of the initial gravitational collapse, we allow one final coordinate change ˆσ+ 7→ˆσ+ f . In these new coordinates, the metric and the dilaton field take the following form: F+ >F−e2ρ =−1∧φ= λ 2 (ˆσ+ f −ˆσ−). (194) ... Equating equations (192) and (195) gives Q′ = λˆaE; while the comparison between equations (193) and (196) results in Q′ + λa0 = 0. This successful comparison indicates that, at least to the first order in perturbation theory, the final geometry corresponds to that of the Minkowski vacuum."

    The end-state geometry is not solved for; it is inserted as an ansatz in Eq. (194) (flat metric and linear dilaton). The matching calculation then fixes the free constants Q′ and λa0 so that the assumed Minkowski form reproduces the near-endpoint derivatives (192)-(193). Since any sufficiently flexible ansatz can be made consistent by choosing its constants, the 'successful comparison' only demonstrates self-consistency of the Minkowski assumption, not that the endpoint necessarily is Minkowski. No uniqueness proof or independent second-order/nonperturbative check is provided; the paper itself notes that the perturbative approach breaks down at this point (after Eq. (163)). The conclusion therefore reduces, by construction, to the assumed form (194).

full rationale

Most of the paper is a self-contained perturbative solution of the dimensionally-reduced semiclassical equations: the evaporating metric (139)-(142), the apparent horizon (147), the endpoint time (161)-(163), and the radiated energy (176)-(177) are derived from the equations of motion with an initial Minkowski condition. Those results have independent content and are not circular. The circular element is concentrated in the final-state claim. In Section V.C the authors 'allow one final coordinate change' and simply take the metric to be F+ >F−e2ρ =−1 with φ=λ/2(σ̂+f−σ̂−), Eq. (194); they then compare the general matching expressions (195)-(196) with the evaporating solution (192)-(193), read off Q′=λâE and λa0=−Q′, and declare that the final geometry is the Minkowski vacuum. This is a consistency check of an assumed ansatz, not a derivation that the end-state is Minkowski, especially because the endpoint δE = exp[−4(λa)2/ε(1−√ε/λa)] has ε ln δE of order one, so the first-order expansion is uncontrolled; the paper acknowledges 'the perturbative approach breaks down at this point.' The self-citations to [8] and [9] are not load-bearing: the M^3 evaporation time is also the thermodynamic expectation and the matching to RST/BPP thunderpop is used as a consistency remark, not as the argument for the end-state. The partial circularity in the central end-state claim warrants a score of 6 rather than higher; the endpoint time and radiated energy remain genuine, independently derived results.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard semiclassical tools, the Polyakov-Liouville action and a perturbative expansion, plus two model-specific premises that are not independently tested: the validity of the expansion at the endpoint and the assumed Minkowski final ansatz. The listed free parameters are integration constants and gauge choices fixed by boundary conditions; they do not fit external data, but they do shape the O(epsilon) solution.

free parameters (5)
  • C(lambda a) = 1/(4 lambda a)
    Quantum correction to the Schwarzschild radius lambda a; chosen to remove the lambda a to 0 divergence and fixed by the continuity condition (108) at delta = 1. It enters theta_0 and the S_0 functions.
  • c_n and ~c_n series constants = c_0 = 0 and S_n(1) = 0 for n >= 1; c_{-1} = -7/2
    Integration constants in the integrals I_n; the paper sets them so that the series terms vanish at x = 1, which corresponds to the freedom of choosing G_+. These choices affect the O(epsilon) metric.
  • G_+ and G_- = G_+ = 0; G_- fixed by Eq. (109)
    Quantum corrections to coordinate transformations; completely determined by demanding continuity of theta along the shockwave and by the choice G_+ = 0.
  • D = epsilon/(4 (lambda a)^2) (pi^2/6 + 1)
    Constant in the asymptotically flat coordinate sigma^+_prime; chosen so that the asymptotic dilaton is unaffected by quantum corrections, Eq. (133).
  • z_n constants = z_n = 6 Z_{2(n-2)}(1)
    Constants appearing in S_n asymptotic behavior and in the coordinate transformation (135); fixed by S_n(1) = 0 and the recurrence relation (100).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The DREH action (5) is the correct dimensional reduction of the four-dimensional Einstein-Hilbert action under the spherical ansatz (2).
    Invoked in Section II; the central equations of motion (11-12) follow from it.
  • standard math The Polyakov-Liouville action (48), localized by the auxiliary field psi in (50), is the correct one-loop effective action for the massless scalar matter.
    Invoked in Section III; yields the quantum energy-momentum tensor (53) and the anomaly trace used in (59-61).
  • domain assumption The quantum state before collapse is the Minkowski/Unruh vacuum with t_+(sigma+) = t_-(sigma-) = 0, and the evaporation flux is obtained by the anomalous transformation to hat-sigma coordinates.
    Section IV; this choice determines t_-(hat-sigma-) in Eq. (90) and hence the radiated energy.
  • ad hoc to paper The first-order perturbative expansion in epsilon = hbar G/12 pi remains valid up to and including the endpoint matching, despite epsilon ln delta_E being of order one.
    Section V; the paper itself states perturbation theory breaks at this point, so the endpoint conclusions rely on this assumption.
  • ad hoc to paper The final geometry can be represented by the Minkowski ansatz of Eq. (194): F_+ F_- e^{2 rho} = -1 and phi = lambda/2 (hat-sigma+_f - hat-sigma-).
    Section V.C; the end-state is matched by assuming this form rather than deriving it from the field equations alone.
  • standard math The convergent series solutions of the transcendental equation (94) given in Appendix B are valid and uniformly convergent on the needed domains.
    Theorems B.1-B.11; used to evaluate the integral I and the S_n functions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Collapse Scenario and Final State of Evaporation for Schwarzschild Black Hole in Dimensionally-Reduced Model of Dilaton Gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KCEIFNBF

@misc{pith2026250609946,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Collapse Scenario and Final State of Evaporation for Schwarzschild Black Hole in Dimensionally-Reduced Model of Dilaton Gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KCEIFNBF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.09946}
}
read the original abstract

We study a model of (1+1)-dimensional dilaton gravity derived from the four-dimensional Einstein-Hilbert action by dimensional reduction in a semiclassical approximation including back-reaction. The reduced action involves the cosmological constant and admits black hole solutions; among these, the solutions of interest are the evaporating black holes. We solve the equations of motion perturbatively by demanding that the initial state geometry is a Minkowski space-time. When the infalling matter intersects the space-time boundary, the black hole forms and begins to evaporate. We find that as the black hole evaporates, its horizon shrinks and at a finite space-time point, it meets the singularity and a shockwave occurs. Along this hypersurface, the metric can be continuously matched to a static end-state geometry. This end-state geometry is Minkowski space-time within the first-order of perturbation theory.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.09946 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Penrose diagram of a gravitational collapse [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Penrose diagram of an evaporating black hole [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Page Curve for an Evaporating Schwarzschild Black Hole in Dimensionally-Reduced Model of Dilaton Gravity

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In a dimensionally-reduced dilaton-gravity model, the island formula produces a Page curve for an evaporating Schwarzschild black hole, with the entropy vanishing at the endpoint.

  2. Wald-like entropy and Islands in Dimensionally Reduced Einstein-Hilbert Gravity

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Wald-like Noether charge of the DREH plus Polyakov-Liouville action yields the island generalized entropy and unitary Page curves for eternal and quasi-stationary evaporating black holes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [32]

    A. M. Polyakov, Quantum geometry of bosonic strings, Physics Letters B103, 207 (1981)

    work page 1981

  2. [1]

    This could be a consequence of the perturbative approach

    Using the formula (118), we arrive at the following: R= 2 a2x3 1 + 3ε 2(λa)2 1 x2 .(150) Equation (150) yields two solutions for the line of singu- larity: xS = 0 and x S ≈ s 3ε 2(λa)2 .(151) Neither of these two solutions corresponds to the ex- pected result x S = √ε λa . This could be a consequence of the perturbative approach. Fortunately, it is possib...

    work page 2023

  3. [2]

    Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions, Phys

    C. Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions, Phys. Lett. B126, 41 (1983)

    work page 1983

  4. [3]

    Jackiw, Lower Dimensional Gravity, Nucl

    R. Jackiw, Lower Dimensional Gravity, Nucl. Phys. B 252, 343 (1985)

    1985

  5. [4]

    C. G. Callan, S. B. Giddings, J. A. Harvey, and A. Stro- minger, Evanescent black holes, Physical Review D45, R1005–R1009 (1992)

    1992

  6. [5]

    J. G. Russo, L. Susskind, and L. Thorlacius, End point of hawking radiation, Phys. Rev. D46, 3444 (1992)

    work page 1992

  7. [6]

    J. G. Russo, L. Susskind, and L. Thorlacius, Cosmic cen- sorship in two-dimensional gravity, Phys. Rev. D47, 533 (1993)

    work page 1993

  8. [7]

    S. Bose, L. Parker, and Y. Peleg, Semi-infinite throat as the end-state geometry of two-dimensional black hole evaporation, Physical Review D52, 3512–3517 (1995)

    work page 1995

Show all 33 references
  1. [8]

    T. M. Fiola, J. Preskill, A. Strominger, and S. P. Trivedi, Black hole thermodynamics and information loss in two dimensions, Physical Review D50, 3987–4014 (1994)

    1994

  2. [9]

    Djordjevi´ c, A

    S. Djordjevi´ c, A. Goˇ canin, D. Goˇ canin, and V. Radovanovi´ c, Page curve for an eternal Schwarzschild black hole in a dimensionally reduced model of dilaton gravity, Phys. Rev. D106, 105015 (2022), arXiv:2207.07409 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Buri´ c and V

    M. Buri´ c and V. Radovanovi´ c, Quantum corrections for an (anti)evaporating black hole, Physical Review D63, 10.1103/physrevd.63.044020 (2001)

    2001 doi

  4. [11]

    V. P. Frolov, W. Israel, and S. N. Solodukhin, On one loop quantum corrections to the thermodynamics of charged black holes, Phys. Rev. D54, 2732 (1996), arXiv:hep-th/9602105

    1996 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Buric, V

    M. Buric, V. Radovanovic, and A. R. Mikovic, One loop correction for Schwarzschild black hole via 2-D dila- ton gravity, Phys. Rev. D59, 084002 (1999), arXiv:gr- qc/9804083

    1999

  6. [13]

    Buric and V

    M. Buric and V. Radovanovic, Quantum corrections for the reissner-nordstr¨ om charged black hole, Classical and Quantum Gravity16, 3937 (1999)

    1999

  7. [14]

    Fabbri and J

    A. Fabbri and J. Navarro-Salas,Modeling black hole evap- oration(2005)

    2005

  8. [15]

    Grumiller, W

    D. Grumiller, W. Kummer, and D. V. Vassilevich, Dila- ton gravity in two-dimensions, Phys. Rept.369, 327 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0204253

    2002 arXiv

  9. [16]

    S. W. Hawking, Breakdown of predictability in gravita- tional collapse, Phys. Rev. D14, 2460 (1976)

    1976

  10. [17]

    Bekenstein, Black holes and the second law, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento (1971-1985)4, 737 (1972)

    J. Bekenstein, Black holes and the second law, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento (1971-1985)4, 737 (1972)

    1972

  11. [18]

    J. D. Bekenstein, Black holes and entropy, Phys. Rev. D 7, 2333 (1973)

    1973

  12. [19]

    S. W. Hawking, Black holes and thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. D13, 191 (1976)

    1976

  13. [20]

    S. W. Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes, Com- mun. Math. Phys.43, 199 (1975), [Erratum: Com- mun.Math.Phys. 46, 206 (1976)]

    1975

  14. [21]

    D. N. Page, Information in black hole radiation, Physical Review Letters71, 3743–3746 (1993)

    1993

  15. [22]

    D. N. Page, Time dependence of hawking radiation en- tropy, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2013(09), 028–028

    2013

  16. [23]

    Almheiri, T

    A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian, and A. Tajdini, Replica wormholes and the entropy of hawking radiation, Journal of High Energy Physics2020, 10.1007/jhep05(2020)013 (2020)

    2020 doi

  17. [24]

    Hartman, E

    T. Hartman, E. Shaghoulian, and A. Strominger, Islands in asymptotically flat 2d gravity, Journal of High Energy Physics2020, 10.1007/jhep07(2020)022 (2020)

    2020 doi

  18. [25]

    X. Wang, R. Li, and J. Wang, Page curves for a family of exactly solvable evaporating black holes, Physical Review D103, 10.1103/physrevd.103.126026 (2021)

    2021 doi

  19. [26]

    Hashimoto, N

    K. Hashimoto, N. Iizuka, and Y. Matsuo, Islands in schwarzschild black holes, Journal of High Energy Physics2020, 10.1007/jhep06(2020)085 (2020)

    2020 doi

  20. [27]

    Anegawa and N

    T. Anegawa and N. Iizuka, Notes on islands in asymptot- ically flat 2d dilaton black holes, Journal of High Energy Physics2020, 10.1007/jhep07(2020)036 (2020)

    2020 doi

  21. [28]

    Yu and X.-H

    M.-H. Yu and X.-H. Ge, Islands and Page curves in charged dilaton black holes, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 14 (2022), arXiv:2107.03031 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  22. [29]

    X. Wang, R. Li, and J. Wang, Islands and Page curves of Reissner-Nordstr¨ om black holes, JHEP04, 103, 22 arXiv:2101.06867 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  23. [30]

    Almheiri, R

    A. Almheiri, R. Mahajan, and J. E. Santos, Entangle- ment islands in higher dimensions, SciPost Phys.9, 001 (2020), arXiv:1911.09666 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  24. [31]

    F. F. Gautason, L. Schneiderbauer, W. Sybesma, and L. Thorlacius, Page Curve for an Evaporating Black Hole, JHEP05, 091, arXiv:2004.00598 [hep-th]

    2004 arXiv

  25. [33]

    1− ˜ε 8 2(x−2) ln x−8 + 5x + 3 x −(x−1) ∞X n=1 δn n! x−1 x dS< n dx −nS < n !#) ,(C1) ∂−x =− 1 2aF− ( 1− 1 + ˜ε 4 lnδ√ x2 −˜ε

    S. Djordjevi´ c and V. Radovanovi´ c, Page Curve for an Evaporating Schwarzschild Black Hole in Dimensionally- Reduced Model of Dilaton Gravity (in preparation), (2025). APPENDIX A. T ransformation laws of the energy-momentum tensor The quantum correction to the energy-momentu...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.