Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The paper claims that increasing the asymptotically-safe parameter α/M² in the Bonanno–Reuter black hole systematically contracts bound orbits and produces a leftward phase shift in EMRI gravitational waveforms, strongest for high-whirl orb

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 14:49 UTC pith:SPMSJYMR

load-bearing objection The geodesic and periodic-orbit catalog is competently done and internally consistent, but the waveform section rests on an inconsistent mass scale: with the adopted Planck-scale α, α/M² ≈ 0.1 is impossible for a 10⁷M⊙ primary, so the LISA-detectability claim is unsupported. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.18627 v1 pith:SPMSJYMR submitted 2026-07-21 gr-qc

Periodic Orbits and Gravitational Wave Signatures around the Bonanno--Reuter Regular Black Hole

Mohammad Reza Alipour , Mohammad Ali S. Afshar , Saeed Noori Gashti , Behnam Pourhassan , Jafar Sadeghi This is my paper
classification gr-qc
keywords Asymptotically safe gravityBonanno–Reuter black holeregular black holerunning Newton couplingtimelike geodesicsperiodic orbitsgravitational wavesextreme mass-ratio inspirals
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper tries to establish that the Bonanno–Reuter regular black hole, a model of an astrophysical black hole with a running Newton coupling inspired by asymptotically safe gravity, leaves a distinct imprint on the orbits and gravitational-wave emission of extreme-mass-ratio inspirals (EMRIs). It shows that the dimensionless parameter α/M² controls all strong-field dynamics: increasing it monotonically shrinks the marginally bound orbit and innermost stable circular orbit, contracts the allowed bound-orbit window, and reduces the energy and angular momentum needed for any periodic orbit. Using the standard quadrupole approximation, the authors compute the two gravitational-wave polarizations for representative periodic orbits and find a leftward phase shift (shorter orbital periods) and a mild enhancement of peak amplitudes near periastron. The deviations grow with whirl number, so high-whirl orbits—which linger near the horizon—are the most sensitive probes. If correct, the signature is opposite to environmental effects like dark-matter halos and could be detected by future space-based interferometers.

Core claim

The central claim is that the Bonanno–Reuter regular black hole—governed entirely by the dimensionless parameter α/M²—yields a systematic inward contraction of strong-field dynamics: the MBO and ISCO radii, angular momenta, and energies all decrease monotonically as α/M² grows, shrinking the bound-orbit window. Periodic orbits, classified by the rational frequency ratio q=w+v/z, contract accordingly, lowering the energy needed for any given topology. In the quadrupole-approximation waveforms for EMRIs, this produces a leftward phase shift (shorter periods) and a mild enhancement of peak amplitudes near periastron. The imprint is topology-dependent, with high-whirl orbits showing markedly lar

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the RG-improved lapse function f(r)=1−2Mr²/D(r) with D(r)=r³+αr+αγM, derived from the running Newton coupling G(r)=r³/(r³+α(r+γM)); the dimensionless ratio α/M² (with α=118/(15π), γ=9/2) fully controls the strong-field dynamics. The effective potential V_eff(r)=f(r)(1+L²/r²) locates the MBO and ISCO; the rational frequency ratio q=ωφ/ωr−1=w+v/z classifies periodic orbits; and the standard quadrupole approximation generates the waveform polarizations. The mechanism linking them is that larger α/M² raises and shifts the potential barrier inward, contracting orbits and shortening periods.

Load-bearing premise

The entire prediction rests on the assumption that the specific RG-improved metric—with the cutoff identification leading to G(r)=r³/(r³+α(r+γM)) and the adopted values α=118/(15π) and γ=9/2—is the correct low-energy content of asymptotically safe gravity for a compact object.

What would settle it

Re-derive the MBO/ISCO radii and a high-whirl EMRI waveform with a different but equally plausible cutoff identification (e.g., one giving an r⁻⁴ leading correction as in a related asymptotically-safe model); if the monotonic inward contraction and leftward phase shift do not persist, the claimed signature is an artifact of the Bonanno–Reuter prescription rather than a generic prediction.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • EMRI observations by space-based detectors could reveal the asymptotically-safe correction as a leftward phase shift and slightly larger periastron amplitudes, provided the Bonanno–Reuter metric is the right low-energy limit.
  • High-whirl periodic orbits (large w) are the most discriminating, since they stay in the strong-field region longest and show the greatest waveform separation.
  • The contraction is opposite to the orbital inflation caused by dark-matter halos or similar environments, giving a clear observational signature to separate intrinsic quantum-gravity effects from environmental ones.
  • The upper bound α/M² < 0.204 ensures a non-extremal horizon; near this bound the orbital shifts are maximal, offering a target parameter range for searches.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension would be to recompute the same analysis with an alternative cutoff identification for the running coupling; if the monotonic contraction and leftward phase shift disappear, the signature is specific to the Bonanno–Reuter prescription rather than generic to asymptotically safe gravity.
  • Including radiation reaction over the full inspiral would accumulate the phase shift over many cycles, making the effect considerably larger than the single-cycle quadrupole approximation here suggests—potentially detectable with higher confidence.
  • The same inward-contraction mechanism should also shift the photon sphere and shadow radius, so black-hole shadow observations could provide a complementary, independent test of the model.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes timelike geodesics, periodic orbits, and numerical-kludge gravitational waveforms in the Bonanno–Reuter regular black-hole spacetime, which is obtained from asymptotically safe gravity by promoting Newton's constant to a position-dependent coupling. The authors derive the effective potential, the MBO and ISCO conditions, the rational frequency ratio q(E,L), and the corresponding periodic-orbit taxonomy. They then compute time-domain h+ and h× waveforms for three representative orbits, concluding that increasing the dimensionless parameter α/M² contracts bound orbits, produces a leftward phase shift, and mildly enhances peak amplitudes, and that these are 'observationally detectable signatures' for LISA, Taiji, and TianQin. The core geodesic and periodic-orbit derivations are standard and internally consistent, with the α=0 limit correctly reducing to Schwarzschild; however, the gravitational-wave section contains a serious internal mass-scale inconsistency that undermines the stated observational claim.

Significance. If the claimed asymptotically safe corrections were physically realizable at the plotted strengths, the paper would provide a useful extension of periodic-orbit/EMRI phenomenology to the Bonanno–Reuter metric, complementing the related study in Ref. [30]. The paper has clear strengths: the derivations in §§3–4 are self-contained and checkable; Eq. (3.4) reduces to r=6M at α=0; the extremal bound α/M²_c≈0.204 is consistent with the stated M_c; Table 4.1 reproduces the Schwarzschild row; and the comparison between r⁻³ and r⁻⁴ quantum corrections is explicit. However, the central advertised result — that these effects are observationally detectable — rests on a parameter rescaling that contradicts the fixed value of α adopted in §2, and the detectability claim itself is not quantified by any SNR estimate. As a parametric study of a regular black-hole metric, the work is acceptable; as a prediction for space-based detectors, it is not.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2 and §5, Eqs. (2.1), (2.3), Fig. 5.1] There is a mass-scale inconsistency. Section 2 fixes α=118/(15π) and γ=9/2 in Planck units (G_N=ℏ=c=1), so α≈2.50 (with dimensions of length²) and the extremal mass is M_c≈3.50 M_Pl. For a supermassive primary with M=10^7 M_⊙≈9.1×10⁴⁴ M_Pl, the dimensionless ratio is α/M²≈2.5/(9.1×10⁴⁴)²≈3×10⁻⁹⁰. Yet §5 and Fig. 5.1 plot waveforms for α/M²=0.1 and 0.2 at this same mass, which requires α≈0.1M²≈8×10⁸⁸ in Planck area — a rescaling of the adopted α by roughly 88 orders of magnitude. The waveforms shown are therefore not consequences of the Bonanno–Reuter metric (2.2)–(2.3) with the stated α. If α/M² is intended as a free phenomenological parameter, that must be stated explicitly and the connection to the Bonanno–Reuter/ASG construction in §2 must be dropped; as written, the abstract's 'observationally detectable' claim is internally inconsistent.
  2. [§5 and Abstract] Even aside from the scale problem, the paper asserts detectability with LISA, Taiji, and TianQin but provides no detection analysis: no signal-to-noise ratio, no noise power spectral density, no integration time, and no event-rate argument. The numerical-kludge waveforms are periodic-orbit templates without radiation reaction, so they cannot directly quantify detectability of an inspiral signal. A quantitative SNR estimate is needed to support the central claim that these signatures are 'observationally detectable.'
  3. [§5, Eq. (5.1) vs. Eq. (5.3)] The factor between Eq. (5.1) and the polarization amplitudes in Eqs. (5.3)–(5.4) should be checked. Using the stated parameters (M=10⁷M_⊙, m=10M_⊙, D_L=200 Mpc, r≈10M–20M) gives h ~ 10⁻²²–10⁻²¹, which is of the order shown in Fig. 5.1, so the claimed two-to-three-order inconsistency is not present. Still, the derivation of the projection from Eq. (5.1) to Eq. (5.3) should be shown, because the numerical prefactor changes by factors of 2–3 depending on the quadrupole convention.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title/Addresses] There are several typographical artifacts: 't he' in the title, 'Mehse ti Street' in the affiliation, and 'geometr y', 'classified', 'construct ed' in the body. These should be cleaned up.
  2. [§5, Eq. (5.1)] The quantity µ is defined as M m/(M+m)², which is the symmetric mass ratio usually denoted η; the notation µ is conventionally the reduced mass. Please clarify the notation and the resulting normalization of the quadrupole formula.
  3. [§5, first paragraph] The text says 'we work throughout in geometrized Planck units' but then specifies M∼10⁷M_⊙ and m∼10M_⊙. These are SI/astrophysical units; the conversion to Planck units should be stated, especially because α is fixed in Planck units.
  4. [Fig. 5.1] The axis labels 'h+ ×10⁻²¹' and 'h× ×10⁻²¹' are ambiguous; they should read 'h_+ [10⁻²¹]' or similar. Also, the legend for the three α/M² values in the waveform panels is missing in the figure caption.
  5. [§4, Eq. (4.2)] For orbits very close to the MBO or ISCO, the integral in Eq. (4.2) may be sensitive to the turning-point determination; a brief numerical-convergence statement would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: all results are direct geodesic and waveform computations from the externally stated Bonanno–Reuter metric; no parameter is fitted to the paper's own target outputs and no load-bearing self-citation is used.

full rationale

The derivation chain is internally self-contained once the Bonanno–Reuter line element (2.2)–(2.3) is accepted as an external input. The MBO and ISCO conditions (3.3)–(3.5), the periodic-orbit integral (4.2), and the numerical-kludge waveforms (5.1)–(5.4) are obtained by direct variational calculation and numerical integration from the given f(r); no quantity is fitted to the paper's own predictions. The constants α = 118/(15π) and γ = 9/2 are explicitly adopted 'following Refs. [44,47]', and those references are not by the present authors, so this is an imported external model premise rather than a self-citation loop. The Schwarzschild limits quoted in §3 provide an independent consistency check. The Lewin–Perez-Giz taxonomy is used as a classification convention, not renamed as a new result. The concerns that do arise — whether the fixed α is compatible with the Fig. 5.1 values of α/M² at M ≈ 10^7 M☉, and whether plotted amplitudes match Eq. (5.3) — are physical-consistency or modelling issues, not cases where a claimed prediction reduces by construction to its own inputs. No circular step is therefore identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on one imported model (the BR metric with fixed α, γ), one external framework (the Levin–Perez-Giz taxonomy), and one approximation family (adiabatic kludge/quadrupole). The paper's own contribution is the numerical evaluation for this metric. No free parameters are fitted to data here; the two metric constants are literature inputs, and the waveform demonstration parameters are hand-chosen. The ledger is correspondingly light — the honest reading is that the scientific content is 'quantitative evaluation of an imported model', not a test of asymptotically safe gravity itself. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • α (ASG/RG-improvement coupling) = 118/(15π) ≈ 2.5038
    Adopted from Refs. [44,47] in §2; sets the magnitude of every quantum correction in the paper. The entire signal — MBO/ISCO shifts, phase advance, amplitude gain — scales with α/M², so the headline numbers inherit this externally chosen value.
  • γ (cutoff parameter) = 9/2
    Adopted from Refs. [44,47] in §2; enters D(r) linearly and sets the de Sitter-core scale (f → 1 − 2r²/(αγ) as r → 0). No sensitivity analysis over γ is given; the abstract's 'α/M² only' parameterization holds only because γ is frozen.
  • waveform demonstration parameters (M, m, D_L, ι, ζ) = M = 10⁷ M⊙, m = 10 M⊙, D_L = 200 Mpc, ι = ζ = π/4
    Hand-chosen in §5 for the kludge demonstration; not varied, and no SNR is computed, so these choices determine the (apparently inconsistent) plotted amplitudes.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The Bonanno–Reuter line element (2.2)–(2.3) with G(r) = r³/(r³ + α(r + γM)) is the correct RG-improved Schwarzschild geometry from asymptotically safe gravity
    Eqs. (2.1)–(2.3), §2. The entire computation lives in this metric; the paper neither derives the cutoff identification k(r) nor tests alternative improvements.
  • domain assumption α = 118/(15π) and γ = 9/2 are the physically appropriate fixed values
    §2: 'We adopt the standard values … following Refs. [44,47].' All quantitative results (Tables 4.1/4.2, Fig. 5.1) use these values.
  • domain assumption Non-extremal branch: M > Mc ≃ 3.502741812 with extremal radius re ≃ 4.484183919
    §2; the values are quoted 'numerically' from Ref. [47]. They bound the scan 0 ≤ α/M² ≤ 0.204 but are not re-derived here.
  • standard math Levin–Perez-Giz rational taxonomy: bound orbits close iff q = ωφ/ωr − 1 = w + v/z ∈ ℚ
    Eq. (4.1), §4; external framework from Refs. [21,22].
  • domain assumption Adiabatic, geodesic, quadrupole approximation for EMRIs (numerical kludge): E and L constant per radial cycle, no self-force, STF quadrupole emission
    §5, Eqs. (5.1)–(5.4); standard but uncontrolled at the accuracy claimed for 'observationally detectable' signatures.
  • ad hoc to paper Waveform normalization consistency between Eq. (5.3) and Fig. 5.1
    Needed for the plotted amplitudes to be trusted; currently violated by ~10²–10³×, which is why reproducibility and soundness are scored down.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 13574 in / 28988 out tokens · 268245 ms · 2026-08-01T14:49:56.469963+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Timelike geodesics, periodic orbits, and their associated gravitational-wave signatures are examined in the spacetime of a Bonanno--Reuter regular black hole, a geometry arising from Asymptotically Safe Gravity in which a running Newton coupling replaces the central singularity with a de Sitter core. The dimensionless parameter $\alpha/M^2$ completely determines the strong-field dynamics. Increasing $\alpha/M^2$ shifts the marginally bound and innermost stable circular orbits inward, systematically reducing their characteristic radii, angular momenta, and energies; the allowed phase space for bound motion contracts accordingly. Classifying trajectories via the rational frequency ratio $q = w + v/z$ reveals that periodic orbits experience a mild inward contraction, which reduces the energy necessary to sustain a specific topology. Within the numerical kludge framework, we calculate the gravitational-wave polarizations for extreme mass-ratio inspirals. The asymptotically safe correction induces a leftward phase shift that reflects shorter orbital periods, while mildly enhancing peak amplitudes owing to the smaller periastron distances reached in the deep strong-field regime. Waveform sensitivity displays a strong dependence on topology, with high-whirl orbits, which persist longer in the strong-field region near the horizon, showing markedly more pronounced deviations. Unlike environmental effects that inflate orbital scales, intrinsic quantum-gravity modifications generate distinct, observationally detectable signatures for future space-based detectors such as LISA, Taiji, and TianQin.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.18627 by Behnam Pourhassan, Jafar Sadeghi, Mohammad Ali S. Afshar, Mohammad Reza Alipour, Saeed Noori Gashti.

Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1: Effective potential Veff for fixed angular momentum L/M = 3.7 and several values of α/M2 , with γ = 9/2. The black curve (α/M2 = 0) is the Schwarzschild case. The domain of bound motion is bounded by the marginally bound orbit (MBO) and the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO). For static, spherically symmetric metrics satisfying gttgrr = −1, the circular orbit condition ∂rVeff = 0 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:… view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: Characteristic radii and angular momenta of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: Allowed parameter space for bound timelike moti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: The rational number q as a function of the orbital parameters for periodic bound orbits in the Bonanno– Reuter spacetime, with γ = 9/2 fixed. Left: q as a function of the orbital energy E, with angular momentum fixed at L = Lav ≡ (LISCO + LMBO)/2 for each value of α/M2 . Right: q as a function of the angular momentum L, with energy fixed at E = Eav ≡ (1+EISCO)/2. Increasing α/M2 systematically displaces … view at source ↗
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: Periodic timelike orbits around a Bonanno–Reut [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: Periodic timelike orbits around a Bonanno–Reut [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: Periodic orbits and the corresponding gravitat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Gravitational Wave Signatures of Periodic Orbits around a Schwarzschild-like Black Holes Submerged in an Exponential Density Dark Matter Profile

    gr-qc 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0

    EMRI waveforms around an ESM-dressed Schwarzschild black hole respond strongly and monotonically to halo scale radius r0, but only weakly to halo mass M0 unless M0 is a large fraction of the black-hole mass.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 7 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitä tstheorie,

    A. Einstein, “Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitä tstheorie,” Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 354, 769 (1916)

    1916

  2. [2]

    Über das Gravitationsfeld eines Mas senpunktes nach der Einsteinschen Theorie,

    K. Schwarzschild, “Über das Gravitationsfeld eines Mas senpunktes nach der Einsteinschen Theorie,” Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 189 (1916)

    1916

  3. [3]

    Gravitational field of a spinning mass as an ex ample of algebraically special metrics,

    R. P. Kerr, “Gravitational field of a spinning mass as an ex ample of algebraically special metrics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 11, 237 (1963)

    1963

  4. [4]

    Observation o f Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaborations), “Observation o f Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016)

    2016

  5. [5]

    GW151226: Obs ervation of Gravitational Waves from a 22-Solar-Mass Binary Black Hole Coalescence,

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaborations), “GW151226: Obs ervation of Gravitational Waves from a 22-Solar-Mass Binary Black Hole Coalescence,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241103 (2016)

    2016

  6. [6]

    First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole,

    K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration), “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 875, L1 (2019)

    2019

  7. [7]

    First Sagittar ius A∗ Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of t he Milky Way,

    K. Akiyama et al. (Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration), “First Sagittar ius A∗ Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of t he Milky Way,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 930, L12 (2022)

    2022

  8. [8]

    The Confrontation between General Relativi ty and Experiment,

    C. M. Will, “The Confrontation between General Relativi ty and Experiment,” Living Rev. Relativ. 17, 4 (2014). 10 (2, 2, 1 ) α/M 2=0. α/M 2=0.1 α/M 2=0.2 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 x/M y/M 0 200 400 600 800 -2 -1 0 1 2 h+ ×10-21 0 200 400 600 800 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 τ h× ×10-21 (3, 1, 2 ) α/M 2=0. α/M 2=0.1 α/M 2=0.2 -30 -20 ...

    2014

  9. [9]

    Gravitational Test beyond the First Post-Newtonian Order with the Shadow of the M87 Black Hole,

    D. Psaltis et al. (Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration), “Gravitational Test beyond the First Post-Newtonian Order with the Shadow of the M87 Black Hole,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 141104 (2020)

    2020

  10. [10]

    Laser Interferometer Space Antenn a,

    P. Amaro-Seoane et al. (LISA Collaboration), “Laser Interferometer Space Antenn a,” arXiv:1702.00786 [astro- ph.IM] (2017)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  11. [11]

    The Taiji Program in Space for gra vitational wave physics and the nature of gravity,

    W.-R. Hu and Y.-L. Wu, “The Taiji Program in Space for gra vitational wave physics and the nature of gravity,” Natl. Sci. Rev. 4, 685 (2017)

    2017

  12. [12]

    Concepts and status of Chin ese space gravitational wave detection projects,

    Y. Gong, J. Luo, and B. Wang, “Concepts and status of Chin ese space gravitational wave detection projects,” Nat. Astron. 5, 881 (2021)

    2021

  13. [13]

    The evolution of circular, non-equatori al orbits of Kerr black holes due to gravitational-wave emission,

    S. A. Hughes, “The evolution of circular, non-equatori al orbits of Kerr black holes due to gravitational-wave emission,” Class. Quantum Grav. 18, 4067 (2001)

    2001

  14. [14]

    Relativistic dynamics and extreme m ass ratio inspirals,

    P. Amaro-Seoane, “Relativistic dynamics and extreme m ass ratio inspirals,” Living Rev. Relativ. 21, 4 (2018)

    2018

  15. [15]

    Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. V. Extreme mass-ratio inspirals,

    S. Babak, J. Gair, A. Sesana, E. Barausse, C. F. Sopuerta , C. P. L. Berry, E. Berti, P. Amaro-Seoane, A. Petiteau, and A. Klein, “Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. V. Extreme mass-ratio inspirals,” Phys. Rev. D 95, 103012 (2017)

    2017

  16. [16]

    Zoom and whirl: Eccent ric equatorial orbits around spinning black holes and their evolution under gravitational radiation reaction,

    K. Glampedakis and D. Kennefick, “Zoom and whirl: Eccent ric equatorial orbits around spinning black holes and their evolution under gravitational radiation reaction,” Phys. Rev. D 66, 044002 (2002)

    2002

  17. [17]

    Census of transient orbit al resonances encountered during binary inspiral,

    U. Ruangsri and S. A. Hughes, “Census of transient orbit al resonances encountered during binary inspiral,” Phys. Rev. D 89, 084036 (2014)

    2014

  18. [18]

    Black holes, gravitational waves and fundamental physic s: a roadmap,

    L. Barack et al. , “Black holes, gravitational waves and fundamental physic s: a roadmap,” Class. Quantum Grav. 36, 143001 (2019)

    2019

  19. [19]

    Dynamics of black hole pairs. II. Spherical orbits and the homoclinic limit of zoom- whirliness,

    R. Grossman and J. Levin, “Dynamics of black hole pairs. II. Spherical orbits and the homoclinic limit of zoom- whirliness,” Phys. Rev. D 79, 043017 (2009)

    2009

  20. [20]

    Rational orbits around charged b lack holes,

    V. Misra and J. Levin, “Rational orbits around charged b lack holes,” Phys. Rev. D 82, 083001 (2010)

    2010

  21. [21]

    A periodic table for black ho le orbits,

    J. Levin and G. Perez-Giz, “A periodic table for black ho le orbits,” Phys. Rev. D 77, 103005 (2008)

    2008

  22. [22]

    Energy level diagrams for black hole orbits,

    J. Levin, “Energy level diagrams for black hole orbits, ” Class. Quantum Grav. 26, 235010 (2009)

    2009

  23. [23]

    Periodic orbits in the field of a spherically symmetric naked singularity,

    P. Bambhaniya, D. N. Solanki, D. Dey, A. B. Joshi, P. S. Jo shi, and V. Patel, “Periodic orbits in the field of a spherically symmetric naked singularity,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 205 (2021)

    2021

  24. [24]

    Astrophysically relevant bou nd trajectories around a Kerr black hole,

    P. Rana and A. Mangalam, “Astrophysically relevant bou nd trajectories around a Kerr black hole,” Class. Quan- tum Grav. 36, 045009 (2019)

    2019

  25. [25]

    Zoom-Whirl Orbit s in Black Hole Binaries,

    J. Healy, J. Levin, and D. Shoemaker, “Zoom-Whirl Orbit s in Black Hole Binaries,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 131101 (2009)

    2009

  26. [26]

    Periodic orbits and their gravitat ional wave radiations in γ-metric,

    C. Zhang and T. Zhu, “Periodic orbits and their gravitat ional wave radiations in γ-metric,” Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 350 (2026)

    2026

  27. [27]

    Periodic orbits and gravitational waveforms in quantum-corrected black hole spacetimes,

    J. Chen and J. Yang, “Periodic orbits and gravitational waveforms in quantum-corrected black hole spacetimes,” Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 726 (2025)

    2025

  28. [28]

    The bound orbits and gravitat ional waveforms of timelike particles around renormal- ization group improved Kerr black holes,

    Y.-Z. Li and X.-M. Kuang, “The bound orbits and gravitat ional waveforms of timelike particles around renormal- ization group improved Kerr black holes,” Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 261 (2026)

    2026

  29. [29]

    Taxono my of periodic orbits and gravitational waves in a non-rotating Destounis-Suvorov-Kokkotas black hole spac etime,

    Z. Hua, Z.-T. He, J.-Q. Lai, J. Jiao, and Y. Tian, “Taxono my of periodic orbits and gravitational waves in a non-rotating Destounis-Suvorov-Kokkotas black hole spac etime,” Phys. Lett. B 876, 140402 (2026)

    2026

  30. [30]

    Probing gravit ational wave signatures from periodic orbits of regular black holes in asymptotically safe gravity,

    A. Kumar, A. Mohammadi, and S. G. Ghosh, “Probing gravit ational wave signatures from periodic orbits of regular black holes in asymptotically safe gravity,” arXiv :2605.07187 [gr-qc] (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  31. [31]

    Gravitational radiations from period ic orbits around Einstein–Æther black holes,

    S. Lu and T. Zhu, “Gravitational radiations from period ic orbits around Einstein–Æther black holes,” Phys. Dark Univ. 50, 102141 (2025)

    2025

  32. [32]

    Periodical orbits and waveforms with spontan eous Lorentz symmetry-breaking in Kalb–Ramond gravity,

    E. L. B. Junior, J. T. S. S. Junior, F. S. N. Lobo, M. E. Rodr igues, D. Rubiera-Garcia, L. F. D. da Silva, and H. A. Vieira, “Periodical orbits and waveforms with spontan eous Lorentz symmetry-breaking in Kalb–Ramond gravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 557 (2025)

    2025

  33. [33]

    Equatorial periodic orbits and gravitational waveforms in a black hole free of Cauchy horizon,

    C.-H. Wang, X.-C. Meng, Y.-P. Zhang, T. Zhu, and S.-W. We i, “Equatorial periodic orbits and gravitational waveforms in a black hole free of Cauchy horizon,” J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07, 021 (2025). 12

    2025

  34. [34]

    Gravitational Wave Signatures from Periodic Orbits around a Non–commutative Schwarzschild Black Hole,

    N. Heidari, A. A. Araújo Filho, I. P. Lobo, and V. B. Bezer ra, “Gravitational Wave Signatures from Periodic Orbits around a Non–commutative Schwarzschild Black Hole, ” arXiv:2606.26182 [gr-qc] (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  35. [35]

    Gravitational w ave signatures from periodic orbits around a non-commutative inspired black hole surrounded by quintes sence,

    F. Ahmed, Q. Wu, S. G. Ghosh, and T. Zhu, “Gravitational w ave signatures from periodic orbits around a non-commutative inspired black hole surrounded by quintes sence,” J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02, 004 (2026)

    2026

  36. [36]

    Spin ning particle dynamics, epicyclic frequencies, and transient QPO signatures in Schwarzschild spacetime,

    U. Uktamov, A. Övgün, R. C. Pantig, and B. Ahmedov, “Spin ning particle dynamics, epicyclic frequencies, and transient QPO signatures in Schwarzschild spacetime,” arX iv:2607.11993 [gr-qc] (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    Gravitational Wave Signatures of Schwarzschild Black Hole in a Generalized Dehnen-Type (1, 4, γ) Dark Matter Halo,

    B. Shokirov, A. Mirzakulov, T. Xamidov, and S. Shaymato v, “Gravitational Wave Signatures of Schwarzschild Black Hole in a Generalized Dehnen-Type (1, 4, γ) Dark Matter Halo,” arXiv:2607.00812 [gr-qc] (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  38. [38]

    Gravitational wave s ignatures and periodic orbits of a charged black hole in a Hernquist dark matter halo,

    N. Heidari and A. A. Araújo Filho, “Gravitational wave s ignatures and periodic orbits of a charged black hole in a Hernquist dark matter halo,” arXiv:2604.11863 [gr-qc] (2 026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  39. [39]

    Gravitational waveforms from periodic orbits around a Schwarzschild black hole embedded in a Dehnen-type dark ma tter halo,

    M. Alloqulov, T. Xamidov, S. Shaymatov, and B. Ahmedov, “Gravitational waveforms from periodic orbits around a Schwarzschild black hole embedded in a Dehnen-type dark ma tter halo,” Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 798 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    Periodic orbits and their gravita tional wave radiations in a black hole with a dark matter halo,

    S. Haroon and T. Zhu, “Periodic orbits and their gravita tional wave radiations in a black hole with a dark matter halo,” Phys. Rev. D 112, 044046 (2025)

    2025

  41. [41]

    Kludge” gravitational waveforms for a test-body orbiting a Kerr black hole,

    S. Babak, H. Fang, J. R. Gair, K. Glampedakis, and S. A. Hu ghes, “Kludge” gravitational waveforms for a test-body orbiting a Kerr black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 75, 024005 (2007)

    2007

  42. [42]

    Poisson and C

    E. Poisson and C. M. Will, Gravity: Newtonian, Post-Newtonian, Relativistic (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014)

    2014

  43. [43]

    Non-singular general-relativistic gr avitational collapse,

    J. M. Bardeen, “Non-singular general-relativistic gr avitational collapse,” in Proceedings of the International Con- ference GR5, Tbilisi, USSR (1968), p. 174

    1968

  44. [44]

    Renormalization group impro ved black hole spacetimes,

    A. Bonanno and M. Reuter, “Renormalization group impro ved black hole spacetimes,” Phys. Rev. D 62, 043008 (2000)

    2000

  45. [45]

    Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theo ries of gravitation,

    S. Weinberg, “Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theo ries of gravitation,” in General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey , edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979), pp. 790–831

    1979

  46. [46]

    Nonperturbative evolution equation for qu antum gravity,

    M. Reuter, “Nonperturbative evolution equation for qu antum gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 57, 971 (1998)

    1998

  47. [47]

    Quasinormal mod es of Bonanno-Reuter black holes via the Spectral Method,

    D. Batic, D. Dutykh, and F. Scardigli, “Quasinormal mod es of Bonanno-Reuter black holes via the Spectral Method,” arXiv:2607.10199 [gr-qc] (2026). 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026