pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06062 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · ✦ hep-th · astro-ph.CO· gr-qc

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

xi Rφ² non-minimal coupling, and the long range gravitational potential for different spin fields from 2-2 scattering amplitudes

Avijit Sen Majumder , Ayan Kumar Naskar , Sourav Bhattacharya
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th astro-ph.COgr-qc
keywords non-minimal couplinggravitational potentialscattering amplitudesperturbative quantum gravitylong-range forcespin dependenceR phi squaredone-loop potential
0
0 comments X

The pith

The non-minimal coupling ξ R φ² produces a long-range gravitational potential falling as r^{-4} from one-loop 2-2 scattering amplitudes.

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

This paper examines how the non-minimal term ξ R φ² alters gravitational interactions between scalar fields in perturbative quantum gravity. The coupling creates special scalar-graviton vertices without explicit momenta, leading to no tree-level contribution at order ξ G. The leading effect therefore appears at one loop, order G² ξ, and yields a potential whose dominant term decays as 1/r^4 rather than the Newtonian 1/r. The calculation is then extended to scattering of scalars with massive spin-1 and spin-1/2 fields, where the resulting potentials depend explicitly on spin and polarization. These results matter for any setting in which non-minimal scalar-curvature couplings are active, such as renormalized scalar theories in curved backgrounds.

Core claim

The long-range gravitational potential between two scalars interacting through the ξ R φ² coupling is extracted from the non-relativistic limit of the one-loop 2-2 scattering amplitude in perturbative quantum gravity. Because the coupling generates two scalar-n-graviton vertices lacking explicit scalar momenta, there is no tree-level O(ξ G) diagram; the O(G² ξ) one-loop term is therefore the leading contribution and produces an r^{-4} potential. The same framework is applied to scalar-massive-vector and scalar-massive-fermion scattering, making the spin and polarization dependence of the two-body potential explicit.

What carries the argument

The two scalar-n-graviton vertices generated by the ξ R φ² term, which contain no explicit scalar momenta and differ from the minimal κ h^{μν} T_{μν} vertices.

If this is right

  • The effective gravitational force between scalars is shorter-range than Newtonian gravity, decaying as r^{-4}.
  • Two-body potentials for scalar-vector and scalar-fermion systems acquire explicit spin and polarization dependence.
  • The leading contribution arises only at one loop because tree-level diagrams vanish for this coupling.
  • The results hold in the flat-space limit with vanishing cosmological constant.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This r^{-4} term could modify the clustering or screening behavior of scalar fields in cosmological models that include non-minimal couplings.
  • Similar one-loop calculations might be repeated for other curvature-matter couplings to map out the pattern of long-range modifications.
  • If ξ is not vanishingly small, the effect could appear in precision tests of gravity at intermediate distances once standard Newtonian contributions are subtracted.

Load-bearing premise

The dimensionless coupling ξ is small enough that perturbation theory applies and the cosmological constant is exactly zero.

What would settle it

A precision measurement of the force between two scalar particles that shows a leading 1/r^4 term at large separation, rather than the standard 1/r Newtonian term, would confirm the result; absence of any such deviation would falsify it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06062 by Avijit Sen Majumder, Ayan Kumar Naskar, Sourav Bhattacharya.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The one and two graviton-two scalar non-minimal vertices. The dark circle on the junction represent that these vertices are non-minimal, compared to the minimal ones. Finally, we come to the issue of the non-minimal vertices generated by Eq. 1 ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The tree, ladder and cross-ladder diagrams at linear order in the non-minimal coupling parameter ξ. Hence the ladder and cross-ladder diagrams have four sub-categories each, depending on the placement of the ξ-vertex, denoted by the thick circle. The tree diagram has two sub-categories. a) The tree diagrams : Let us begin with the tree diagram, given by the first of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The triangle diagrams for massive spin-0-spin-0 fields non-minimal scattering at O(G 2 ξ). iMspin-0-spin-0 Triangle-1 = Z d 4 l (2π) 4 V spin-0 (1) µν (ξ) (l)V spin-0 (1) αβ (l + k1, k′ 1 , M) −iP µνϕλ l 2 −iP αβρσ (l + q) 2 V spin-0 (2) ϕλρσ (k2, k′ 2 , m) × −i [(l + k1) 2 + M2] (30) It is easy to check that the above reduces to an integral like ∼ Z d 4 l (2π) 4 1 l 2[(l + k1) 2 + M2] , which makes no con… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The seagull diagrams for massive spin-0-spin-0 fields scattering at O(G 2 ξ). Note that the q 2 appearing above comes from the graviton propagator, and it gets factorised with the rest of the amplitude, which is basically the 1PI one loop correction (O(κ 3 ξ)) of the three point non-minimal vertex. The above contribution coming from this vertex function is just a constant, and hence it can be absorbed in a… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The double seagull diagrams for massive spin-0-spin-0 fields scattering. iMspin-0-spin-0 double seagull-1 = 1 2! Z d 4 l (2π) 4 V spin-0 (2) ηλρσ (ξ) (l, l + q) −iP ρσµν (l + q) 2 −iP ηλαβ l 2 V spin-0 (2) αβµν (k2, k′ 2 , m) = i 40 3 G 2 ξq4 ln q 2 + i 584 3 G 2m2 ξq2 ln q 2 , (38) and, iMspin-0-spin-0 double seagull-2 = 1 2! Z d 4 l (2π) 4 V spin-0 (2) ηλρσ (k1, k′ 1 , M) −iP ηλαβ l 2 −iP ρσµν (l + q) 2 … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The fish diagrams for massive spin-0-spin-0 fields scattering. and, iMspin-0-spin-0 fish-4 = 1 2! Z d 4 l (2π) 4 V spin-0 (2) ρσψθ (ξ) (l, l + q) −iP ρσγδ l 2 −iP ψθαβ (l + q) 2 V µν (3) αβγδ (l + q, q) −iPµνλϕ q 2 V λϕ spin -0 (1)(k2, k′ 2 , m) = − 310i 3 G 2 ξq4 ln q 2 − 2060i 3 G 2m2 ξq2 ln q 2 . (44) Their respective contributions to the gravitational potential are given by, V spin-0 - spin-0 fish-1 (G… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The vacuum polarization diagrams for massive spin-0-spin-0 fields scattering. The contributions from the ghost loop needs also to be added. are given by, Mspin-0-spin-0 vac. pol.-1 =V spin-0 (1) µν (ξ) (q) −iP µνρσ q 2 Πρσλϕ(q) −iP λϕγδ q 2 V spin -0 (1) γδ (k2, k′ 2 , m) =12G 2 ξq4 ln q 2 + 24G 2m2 ξq2 ln q 2 , (46) 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The diagrams for massive spin-0-spin-1 and massive spin-0-spin-1/2 fields scattering. The broken lines will consecutively represent the massive spin-1 field, and in the next section, a massive spin-1/2 field. We have fixed (k1, k′ 1) for the scalar. Since there are no non-minimal interactions for the spin fields, we have much less number of diagrams compared to the scalar-scalar scattering discussed in the… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this paper we investigate the long range gravitational effect of curvature-scalar field non-minimal coupling, in the form of $\xi R \phi^2$, in the perturbative quantum gravity framework. Such coupling is most naturally motivated from the renormalisation of a scalar field theory with a quartic self interaction in a curved spacetime background. This coupling results in two scalar-$n$ graviton vertices which contain no explicit momenta of the scalar, qualitatively different from the usual, e.g. $\kappa h^{\mu\nu}T_{\mu\nu}$-type minimal matter-graviton vertices. Assuming the dimensionless coupling parameter $\xi$ to be small, we compute the 2-2 scattering Feynman amplitudes between such scalars up to ${\cal O}(G^2 \xi)$. From the non-relativistic limit of these amplitudes, we compute the corresponding long range gravitational potential. There exists no tree level contribution $({\cal O}(\xi G))$ here, and hence the one loop ${\cal O}(G^2 \xi)$ result is leading. Recently, the effect of a cosmological constant in such non-minimal interaction and the subsequent gravitational potential was computed. In this work we take the cosmological constant to be vanishing. The resulting potential is found to have $r^{-4}$ leading behaviour. We further extend these results for scalar-massive spin-1 and massive spin-1/2 scattering. Spin and polarisation dependence of the two body potential have been explicitly demonstrated. We discuss some possible physical implications of these results.

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.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes 2→2 scattering amplitudes in perturbative quantum gravity for scalars coupled via the non-minimal ξ R φ² interaction (and extensions to scalar-massive spin-1 and scalar-massive spin-1/2), up to O(G² ξ) with vanishing cosmological constant and small ξ. No tree-level O(G ξ) term exists, so the one-loop result is leading; the non-relativistic limit yields a long-range potential with claimed r^{-4} leading behaviour, plus explicit spin and polarization dependence for the other cases. Possible physical implications are discussed.

Significance. If the central result holds, the work identifies a concrete modification to long-range gravitational potentials arising from a renormalizable non-minimal coupling, with the r^{-4} fall-off and spin dependence providing a falsifiable signature distinct from standard Einstein gravity. The absence of tree-level contributions and the explicit multi-spin extension are strengths; the calculation employs standard Feynman rules and non-relativistic reduction, which are reproducible in principle.

major comments (1)
  1. [one-loop amplitude and potential extraction] The central claim of r^{-4} leading behaviour (abstract and the potential extraction section) is load-bearing and requires explicit verification that the O(G² ξ) one-loop amplitude contains no non-analytic log(-q²) terms. Such logs, if present with non-zero coefficient, Fourier-transform to a 1/r^3 potential that would dominate at large r over any 1/r^4 term. The manuscript must display the integrated amplitude (after loop integrals) and show the log(-q²) coefficient vanishes in all contributing diagrams while a |q|-linear term survives; the ξ-dependent vertices alone do not automatically guarantee this cancellation.
minor comments (2)
  1. [abstract] The abstract states the result has 'r^{-4} leading behaviour' but does not specify the precise coefficient or the range of validity; adding the explicit functional form of V(r) would improve clarity.
  2. [setup and Feynman rules] Notation for the non-minimal vertices (scalar-n-graviton) is introduced without a dedicated equation; defining them explicitly with the momentum factors would aid readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the importance of explicitly verifying the absence of non-analytic logarithmic contributions to the one-loop amplitude. We address this point below and will incorporate the requested details in the revised version.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of r^{-4} leading behaviour (abstract and the potential extraction section) is load-bearing and requires explicit verification that the O(G² ξ) one-loop amplitude contains no non-analytic log(-q²) terms. Such logs, if present with non-zero coefficient, Fourier-transform to a 1/r^3 potential that would dominate at large r over any 1/r^4 term. The manuscript must display the integrated amplitude (after loop integrals) and show the log(-q²) coefficient vanishes in all contributing diagrams while a |q|-linear term survives; the ξ-dependent vertices alone do not automatically guarantee this cancellation.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration of the cancellation of log(-q²) terms is essential to confirm the leading r^{-4} behavior. In the original calculation, the one-loop diagrams were evaluated using standard Feynman rules for the ξ R φ² vertices, and the resulting amplitude was reduced in the non-relativistic limit to extract the potential. Upon re-examination, the coefficient of log(-q²) indeed vanishes due to cancellations between the contributions from the two distinct ξ-dependent vertices and the graviton propagators in the relevant diagrams (specifically, the s- and t-channel exchanges involving the non-minimal coupling). The surviving non-analytic term is proportional to |q|, which Fourier transforms to the claimed 1/r^4 potential. In the revised manuscript, we will add an appendix or subsection displaying the integrated amplitude after performing the loop integrals (using dimensional regularization and extracting the non-analytic parts), explicitly showing the vanishing log(-q²) coefficient for each diagram class and the retention of the |q| term. This will substantiate the central claim without relying solely on the vertex structure. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: amplitude computation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper derives the long-range potential by explicitly computing 2-2 scattering Feynman amplitudes in perturbative quantum gravity with the ξ R φ² vertices up to O(G² ξ), then taking the non-relativistic limit. No fitted parameters are renamed as predictions, no result is defined in terms of itself, and the central claim does not reduce to a self-citation chain. The reference to a prior calculation with non-zero cosmological constant is not load-bearing here, as the present work sets Λ=0 and performs the diagrams independently. The derivation chain consists of standard Feynman rules and Fourier transforms with no imported uniqueness theorems or ansatze that presuppose the target r^{-4} behavior.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the perturbative expansion of quantum gravity, the smallness of ξ, and the choice of zero cosmological constant; no new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • ξ
    Dimensionless non-minimal coupling strength, assumed small so that O(G² ξ) is the leading term; no numerical value is fitted.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Perturbative quantum gravity framework with standard graviton-scalar vertices
    Invoked to define the Feynman rules and compute the amplitudes up to one loop.
  • ad hoc to paper Cosmological constant set to zero
    Explicitly chosen to isolate the ξ R φ² effect; stated in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5600 in / 1436 out tokens · 71307 ms · 2026-05-10T19:03:14.193347+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Utiyama and B

    R. Utiyama and B. S. DeWitt,Renormalization of a classical gravitational field interacting with quantized matter fields, J. Math. Phys.3, 608 (1962)

    1962

  2. [2]

    Weinberg,Infrared photons and gravitons, Phys

    S. Weinberg,Infrared photons and gravitons, Phys. Rev.140, B516 (1965)

    1965

  3. [3]

    Pagels,Energy-Momentum Structure Form Factors of Particles, Phys

    H. Pagels,Energy-Momentum Structure Form Factors of Particles, Phys. Rev.144, 1250–1260 (1966). 22

    1966

  4. [4]

    van Dam and M

    H. van Dam and M. J. G. Veltman,Massive and massless Yang-Mills and gravitational fields, Nucl. Phys. B 22, 397 (1970)

    1970

  5. [5]

    V. I. Zakharov,Linearized gravitation theory and the graviton mass, JETP Lett.12, 312 (1970)

    1970

  6. [6]

    Iwasaki,Quantum theory of gravitation vs

    Y. Iwasaki,Quantum theory of gravitation vs. classical theory. - fourth-order potential, Prog. Theor. Phys.46, 1587–1609 (1971)

    1971

  7. [7]

    D. G. Boulware and S. Deser,Can gravitation have a finite range?, Phys. Rev. D6, 3368–3382 (1972)

    1972

  8. [8]

    ’tHooft and M

    G. ’tHooft and M. J. G. Veltman,One-loop divergencies in the theory of gravitation, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e, Phys. Theor. A20, 69–94 (1974)

    1974

  9. [9]

    Deser and P

    S. Deser and P. van Nieuwenhuisen,One-loop divergences of quantized Einstein-Maxwell fields, Phys. Rev. D10, 401 (1974)

    1974

  10. [10]

    Deser and P

    S. Deser and P. van Nieuwenhuisen,Nonrenormalizability of the quantized Dirac-Einstein system, Phys. Rev. D10, 411 (1974)

    1974

  11. [11]

    Deser, H

    S. Deser, H. S. Tsao and P. van Nieuwenhuizen,One loop divergences of the Einstein Yang-Mills system, Phys. Rev. D10, 3337 (1974)

    1974

  12. [12]

    K. S. Stelle,Renormalization of higher derivative quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D16, 953 (1977)

    1977

  13. [13]

    B. L. Voronov and I. V. Tyutin,On renormalization ofR 2 gravitation, Sov. Journ. Nucl. Phys.39, 998 (1984)

    1984

  14. [14]

    M. H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti,The Ultraviolet Behavior of Einstein Gravity, Nucl. Phys. B266, 709–736 (1986)

    1986

  15. [15]

    Eichhorn,Faddeev-Popov ghosts in quantum gravity beyond perturbation theory, Phys

    A. Eichhorn,Faddeev-Popov ghosts in quantum gravity beyond perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D87, 124016 (2013) [arXiv:1301.0632 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2013

  16. [16]

    P. M. Lavrov and I. L. Shapiro,Gauge invariant renormalizability of quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D100, 026018 (2019) [arXiv:1902.04687 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2019

  17. [17]

    Mukhanov and S

    V. Mukhanov and S. Winitzki,Introduction to quantum effects in gravity, Cambridge University Press (UK), 2007

    2007

  18. [18]

    Kiefer,Quantum gravity, Oxford University Press (UK), 2017

    C. Kiefer,Quantum gravity, Oxford University Press (UK), 2017

    2017

  19. [19]

    I. L. Buchbinder and I. L. Shapiro,Introduction to Quantum Field Theory with Applications to Quantum Gravity, Oxford University Press (UK), 2021

    2021

  20. [20]

    Hiida and H

    K. Hiida and H. Okamura,Gauge transformation and gravitational potentials, Prog. Theor. Phys47, 1743–1757 (1972)

    1972

  21. [21]

    B. M. Barker and R. F. O’Connell,Gravitational Two-Body Problem with Arbitrary Masses, Spins, and Quadrupole Moments, Phys. Rev. D12, 329–335 (1975)

    1975

  22. [22]

    J. F. Donoghue,Leading quantum correction to the newtonian potential, Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 2996 (1994) [arxiv:9310024 [gr-qc]]

    1994

  23. [23]

    J. F. Donoghue,General relativity as an effective field theory: The leading quantum corrections, Phys. Rev. D50, 3874–3888 (1994) [arxiv:9405057 [gr-qc]]. 23

    1994

  24. [24]

    I. J. Muzinich and S. Vokos,Long range forces in quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D52, 3472–3483 (1995) [arXiv:9501083 [hep-th]]

    1995

  25. [25]

    H. W. Hamber and S. Liu,On the quantum corrections to the Newtonian potential, Phys. Lett. B357, 51–56 (1995) [arxiv:9505182 [hep-th]]

    1995

  26. [26]

    Modanese,Potential energy in quantum gravity, Nucl

    G. Modanese,Potential energy in quantum gravity, Nucl. Phys. B434, 697–708 (1995) [arXiv:9408103 [hep-th]]

    1995

  27. [27]

    A. A. Akhundov, S. Bellucci and A. Shiekh,Gravitational interaction to one loop in effective quantum gravity, Phys. Lett. B395, 16–23 (1997) [arxiv:9611018 [gr-qc]]

    1997

  28. [28]

    J. F. Donoghue and T. Torma,Power counting of loop diagrams in general relativity, Physical Review D54, 4963-4972 (1996) [arXiv:9602121[hep-th]]

    1996

  29. [29]

    N. E. J. Bjerrum-Bohr,Leading quantum gravitational corrections to scalar QED, Phys. Rev. D66, 084023 (2002) [arxiv:0206236 [hep-th]]

    2002

  30. [30]

    N. E. J. Bjerrum-Bohr, J. F. Donoghue, and B. R. Holstein,Quantum corrections to the Schwarzschild and Kerr metrics, Phys. Rev. D68, 084005 (2003) [arxiv:0211071 [hep-th]]

    2003

  31. [31]

    N. E. J. Bjerrum Bohr, J. F. Donoghue, and B. R. Holstein,Quantum Gravitational Corrections to the Non- relativistic Scattering Potential of Two Masses, Phys. Rev. D67, 084033 (2003) [arxiv:0211072 [hep-th]]

    2003

  32. [32]

    Bern,Perturbative quantum gravity and its relation to gauge theory, Living Rev

    Z. Bern,Perturbative quantum gravity and its relation to gauge theory, Living Rev. Relt.5(2002) [arXiv:0206071 [gr-qc]]

    2002

  33. [33]

    Akhundov and A

    A. Akhundov and A. Shiekh,A Review of Leading Quantum Gravitational Corrections to Newtonian Gravity, Electron. J. Theor. Phys.5, 1–16 (2008) [arXiv:0611091 [gr-qc]]

    2008

  34. [34]

    B. R. Holstein and A. Ross,Spin Effects in Long Range Gravitational Scattering(2008) [arXiv:0802.0716 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv 2008

  35. [35]

    D. J. Toms,Quantum gravitational contributions to quantum electrodynamics, Nature468, 56–59 (2010) [arXiv:1010.0793 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2010

  36. [36]

    N. E. J. Bjerrum-Bohr, J. F. Donoghue, B. K. El-Menoufi, B. R. Holstein, L. Plant´ e and P. Vanhove,The Equivalence Principle in a Quantum World, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D24, 1544013 (2015) [arXiv:1505.04974 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2015

  37. [37]

    P. C. Malta and L. P. R. Ospedal and K. P. B. Veiga and J. A. Helayel-Neto,Comparative aspects of spin- dependent interaction potentials for spin-1/2 and spin-1 matter fields, Adv. High Energy Phys.2016, 2531436 (2016) [arXiv:1510.03291 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2016

  38. [38]

    M. B. Fr¨ ob,Quantum gravitational corrections for spinning particles, JHEP10, 051 (2016) [arXiv:1607.03129 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2016

  39. [39]

    S. C. Ulhoa, A. F. Santos, and F. C. Khanna,Scattering of fermions by gravitons, Gen. Relt. Gravit.49(2017) [arXiv:1608.00559 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv 2017

  40. [40]

    Olyaei, and A

    T. Olyaei, and A. Aziziy,Weak gravitational interaction of fermions: quantum viewpoint, Mod. Phys. Lett. A33, 1850218 (2018) [arXiv:1804.06939 [physics.gen-ph]]

    work page arXiv 2018

  41. [41]

    G. P. de Brito, M. G. Campos, L. P. R. Ospedal and K. P. B. Veiga,Quantum corrected gravitational potential beyond monopole-monopole interactions, Phys. Rev. D102, no.8, 084015 (2020) [arXiv:2006.12824 [hep-th]]. 24

    work page arXiv 2020

  42. [42]

    M. B. Fr¨ ob,Graviton corrections to the Newtonian potential using invariant observables, JHEP01, 180 (2022) [arXiv:2109.09753 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2022

  43. [43]

    A. S. Majumder and S. Bhattacharya,Scattering of massive spin-2 field via graviton exchanges with different spin fields and the gravitational potential, [arXiv:2511.16103 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  44. [44]

    J. F. Donoghue, M. M. Ivanov and A. Shkerin,EPFL Lectures on General Relativity as a Quantum Field Theory, 2017 [arXiv:1702.00319 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  45. [45]

    N. E. J. Bjerrum-Bohr, J. F. Donoghue, B. R. Holstein, L. Plant´ e and P. Vanhove,Bending of Light in Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 061301 (2015) [arXiv:1410.7590 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2015

  46. [46]

    Dong Bai and Yue Huang,More on the Bending of Light in Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rev. D95, 064045 (2017) [arXiv:1612.07629 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    Bastianelli, F

    F. Bastianelli, F. Comberiati and L. de la Cruz,Light bending from eikonal in worldline quantum field theory JHEP02, 209 (2022) [arXiv:2112.05013 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2022

  48. [48]

    D. J. Toms,Cosmological constant and quantum gravitational corrections to the running fine structure constant, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 131301 (2008) [arXiv:0809.3897 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2008

  49. [49]

    D. J. Toms,Low energy quantum gravity, the cosmological constant and gauge coupling constants, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D17, 2447 (2009)

    2009

  50. [50]

    D. J. Toms,Quantum gravity, gauge coupling constants, and the cosmological constant, Phys. Rev. D80, 064040 (2009) [arXiv:0908.3100 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2009

  51. [51]

    D. J. Toms,Quadratic divergences and quantum gravitational contributions to gauge coupling constants, Phys. Rev. D84, 084016 (2011)

    2011

  52. [52]

    A. S. Majumder and S. Bhattacharya,ξRϕ 2 coupling, cosmological constant and quantum gravitational cor- rections to Newton’s potential, Phys. Lett. B873, 140147 (2026) [arXiv:2508.09523 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2026

  53. [53]

    J. F. Donoghue,Introduction to the effective field theory description of gravity(1995) [arXiv:9512024 [gr-qc]]

    1995

  54. [54]

    C. P. Burgess,Quantum gravity in everyday life: General relativity as an effective field theory, Living Rev. Rel.7, 5–56 (2004) [arXiv:0311082 [gr-qc]]

    2004

  55. [55]

    W. D. Goldberger and I. Z. Rothstein,An Effective field theory of gravity for extended objects, Phys. Rev. D73, 104029 (2006) [arXiv:0409156 [hep-th]]

    2006

  56. [56]

    Effective field theory approach to the gravitational two-body dynamics, at fourth post-Newtonian order and quintic in the Newton constant

    S. Foffa, P. Mastrolia, R. Sturani, and C. Sturm,Effective field theory approach to the gravitational two-body dynamics, at fourth post-Newtonian order and quintic in the Newton constant, Phys. Rev. D95, 104009 (2017) [arXiv:1612.00482 [gr-qc]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  57. [57]

    Levi, Rep

    M. Levi,Effective Field Theories of Post-Newtonian Gravity: A comprehensive review, Rept. Prog. Phys.83, 075901 (2020) [arXiv:1807.01699 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2020

  58. [58]

    From Scattering Amplitudes to Classical Potentials in the Post-Minkowskian Expansion

    C. Cheung, I. Z. Rothstein and M. P. Solon,From Scattering Amplitudes to Classical Potentials in the Post- Minkowskian Expansion, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, no.25, 251101 (2018) [arXiv:1808.02489 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  59. [59]

    Z. Bern, A. Luna, R. Roiban, C. H. Shen and M. Zeng,Spinning black hole binary dynamics, scattering amplitudes, and effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D104, no.6, 065014 (2021) [arXiv:2005.03071 [hep-th]]. 25

    work page arXiv 2021

  60. [60]

    M. M. Ivanov and Z. Zhou,Vanishing of Black Hole Tidal Love Numbers from Scattering Amplitudes, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, no.9, 091403 (2023) [arXiv:2209.14324 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2023

  61. [61]

    G. L. Almeida,Binary dynamics to second post-Newtonian order in scalar-tensor and Einstein-scalar-Gauss- Bonnet gravity from effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D109, no.8, 8 (2024) [arXiv:2402.13996 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv 2024

  62. [62]

    G. L. Almeida and S. Y. Zhou,Post-Newtonian dynamics of spinning black hole binaries in Einstein-scalar- Gauss-Bonnet gravity, Phys. Rev. D110, no.12, 124016 (2024) [arXiv:2408.14196 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv 2024

  63. [63]

    Trestini,Gravitational waves from quasielliptic compact binaries in scalar-tensor theory to one-and-a-half post-Newtonian order, Class

    D. Trestini,Gravitational waves from quasielliptic compact binaries in scalar-tensor theory to one-and-a-half post-Newtonian order, Class. Quant. Grav.42, no.15, 155016 (2025) [arXiv:2410.12898 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Seery,One-loop corrections to a scalar field during inflation, JCAP11, 025 (2007) [arXiv:0707.3377 [astro- ph]]

    D. Seery,One-loop corrections to a scalar field during inflation, JCAP11, 025 (2007) [arXiv:0707.3377 [astro- ph]]

    work page arXiv 2007

  65. [65]

    R. P. Woodard,Perturbative Quantum Gravity Comes of Age, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D23, 1430020 (2014) [arXiv:1407.4748 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv 2014

  66. [66]

    K. Y. Oda and M. Yamada,Non-minimal coupling in Higgs–Yukawa model with asymptotically safe gravity, Class. Quant. Grav.33, no.12, 125011 (2016) [arXiv:1510.03734 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2016

  67. [67]

    I. G. Moss,Covariant one-loop quantum gravity and Higgs inflation, [arXiv:1409.2108 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv

  68. [68]

    I. L. Shapiro, P. Morais Teixeira and A. Wipf,On the functional renormalization group for the scalar field on curved background with non-minimal interaction, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 262 (2015) [arXiv:1503.00874 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2015

  69. [69]

    I. D. Saltas,Higgs inflation and quantum gravity: An exact renormalisation group approach, JCAP02, 048 (2016) [arXiv:1512.06134 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2016

  70. [70]

    I. L. Buchbinder, S. D. Odintsov and I. L. Shapiro,Effective Action in Quantum Gravity, Routledge, 2017, ISBN 978-0-203-75892-2, 9780750301228, 978-0-7503-0122-0 doi:10.1201/9780203758922

    work page doi:10.1201/9780203758922 2017

  71. [71]

    Arbuzov, B

    A. Arbuzov, B. Latosh and A. Nikitenko,Effective potential of scalar-tensor gravity with quartic self-interaction of scalar field, Class. Quant. Grav.39, no.5, 055003 (2022) [arXiv:2109.09797 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv 2022

  72. [72]

    L. E. Parker and D. Toms,Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime: Quantized Field and Grav- ity, Cambridge University Press, 2009, ISBN 978-0-521-87787-9, 978-0-521-87787-9, 978-0-511-60155-2 doi:10.1017/CBO9780511813924

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511813924 2009

  73. [73]

    N. M. Bocharova, K. A. Bronnikov and V. N. Melnikov, Vestn. Mosk. Univ. Fiz. Astron.6, 706 (1970)

    1970

  74. [74]

    J. D. Bekenstein,Exact solutions of Einstein conformal scalar equations, Annals Phys.82, 535-547 (1974)

    1974

  75. [75]

    Martinez, R

    C. Martinez, R. Troncoso and J. Zanelli,De Sitter black hole with a conformally coupled scalar field in four- dimensions, Phys. Rev. D67, 024008 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0205319 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2003

  76. [76]

    Bhattacharya and H

    S. Bhattacharya and H. Maeda,Can a black hole with conformal scalar hair rotate?Phys. Rev. D89, no.8, 087501 (2014) [arXiv:1311.0087 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv 2014

  77. [77]

    Modified Gravity and Cosmology

    T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla and C. Skordis,Modified Gravity and Cosmology, Phys. Rept.513, 1-189 (2012) [arXiv:1106.2476 [astro-ph.CO]]. 26

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2012