Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 69 references

Conserved charges and asymptotic symmetries of BTZ-like black holes in Einstein-bumblebee gravity

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In Einstein-bumblebee gravity, Lorentz violation rescales the BTZ-like black hole's mass, angular momentum, and entropy by factors of $\sqrt{1+s}$, while the dual conformal field theory still reproduces the entropy exactly.

desk verdict Useful SPSM charge computation, but the Cardy entropy match is rigged by an unexplained √(1+s) prefactor. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13985 v2 pith:3WMVZFVE submitted 2025-04-18 hep-th gr-qc

Hai-Feng Ding This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qc MSC 83C5783C4081T4083C30 PACS 04.70.-s04.60.-m11.25.Tq
keywords Einstein-bumblebeegravityBTZblackholeconservedchargessolutionphasespacemethodasymptoticsymmetriesVirasoroalgebrawarpedconformalfieldtheoryLorentzviolation
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

This paper establishes that in Einstein-bumblebee gravity, the conserved charges of the rotating BTZ-like black hole—mass, angular momentum, and entropy—are all rescaled by the Lorentz-violating parameter when computed with the solution phase space method: $M=\sqrt{1+s}\,\mu/(4G)$, $J=\sqrt{1+s}\,j/(4G)$, and $S=(1+s)\pi r_+/G$. It then shows that these charges satisfy the first law of black hole thermodynamics, in contrast with the earlier thermodynamic derivation for the same solution. On the holographic side, the paper computes the asymptotic symmetry algebra of the three-dimensional anti-de Sitter background as two commuting Virasoro copies with central charge $c=3\sqrt{1+s}\,l/G$, and uses the microscopic entropy-counting formula for the dual conformal field theory to obtain $S_{\mathrm{CFT}}=(1+s)\pi r_+/G$, matching the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy exactly. For the extremal near-horizon geometry, applying newly constructed near-horizon boundary conditions yields a Virasoro-Kac-Moody $\mathrm{U}(1)$ algebra, the symmetry algebra of a warped conformal field theory. The point is that Lorentz violation shifts the mass, spin, and entropy by factors of the LV parameter while leaving both the first law and the holographic entropy match intact.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the surface charge density $k_\xi(\delta\Phi,\Phi)$ of the solution phase space method: an $(n-2;1)$-form built from the Noether-Wald charge and the symplectic potential that gives charge variations as boundary integrals. For Einstein-bumblebee gravity the density splits into metric, metric-bumblebee, and bumblebee-field pieces, and its integrals over a circle at infinity for the Killing vectors $\partial_t$, $-\partial_\phi$, and $\partial_t+\Omega_H\partial_\phi$ produce respectively the mass, angular momentum, and entropy. The Lorentz-violating factors enter through the explicit BTZ-like solution with its nonminimally coupled bumblebee field. For the asymptotic sector, the machinery consists of the standard AdS$_3$ boundary conditions for the metric together with compatible falloff conditions on the bumblebee field, which yield two Virasoro towers and the central charge; for the near-horizon sector, it is a finite coordinate transformation acting on the extremal geometry that generates the Virasoro-Kac-Moody $\mathrm{U}(1)$ algebra.

What would settle it

Insert the paper's values $c=3\sqrt{1+s}\,l/G$ and $\tilde L_0^\pm=\sqrt{1+s}\,l(\mu\pm j/l)/(8G)$ into the unmodified microscopic entropy formula for two Virasoro copies; for $j=0$ this gives $\pi\sqrt{1+s}\,l\sqrt{\mu}/G$, which is the paper's claimed entropy divided by $\sqrt{1+s}$. A derivation (or a counterexample) showing whether the extra factor is a genuine property of the dual CFT would settle the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that the bumblebee field's spontaneous Lorentz violation renormalizes, rather than destroys, the standard three-dimensional black hole holography. The surface charge integrals give the mass and angular momentum with a common factor $\sqrt{1+s}$ multiplying the bare parameters $\mu$ and $j$, while the horizon charge gives an entropy with the larger factor $1+s$. The asymptotic charge algebra remains two Virasoro algebras, now with central charge $c=3\sqrt{1+s}\,l/G$, and the microscopic entropy obtained from that central charge coincides with the SPSM Bekenstein-Hawking entropy. In the extremal limit, the new near-horizon boundary conditions turn the symmetry algebra into a Virasoro-Kac-Moody $\mathrm{U}(1)$ algebra with the same Virasoro central charge, indicating a warped conformal field theory dual. Thus the paper's discovery is a Lorentz-violating but still holographically consistent version of the BTZ story, with all thermodynamic charges carrying explicit $\sqrt{1+s}$ or $1+s$ factors.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the standard microscopic entropy-counting formula for the dual conformal field theory can be multiplied by an extra $\sqrt{1+s}$ prefactor; if that prefactor has no derivation from the CFT data, the exact match between the microscopic entropy and $S=(1+s)\pi r_+/G$ is not established by the paper's own calculation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For the BTZ-like bumblebee black hole, the mass and angular momentum each carry a factor $\sqrt{1+s}$, and the entropy carries $1+s$, so Lorentz violation directly changes the thermodynamic bookkeeping.
  • The first law $\delta S=(\delta M-\Omega_H\,\delta J)/T_H$ holds with these renormalized charges, and there is no extra $\mathrm{U}(1)$ charge term because the bumblebee's internal symmetry is broken.
  • The asymptotic symmetry algebra is still two commuting Virasoro algebras, now with central charge $c=3\sqrt{1+s}\,l/G$, so the dual is a conformal field theory whose central charge depends on Lorentz violation.
  • The microscopic entropy computed from this central charge equals the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, giving a holographic consistency check of the SPSM charges.
  • In the extremal near-horizon limit with the new boundary conditions, the symmetry algebra is a Virasoro-Kac-Moody $\mathrm{U}(1)$ algebra with the same Virasoro central charge and a Kac-Moody level $\hat{k}=\sqrt{1+s}\,l^2L^2\mu/(4\pi^2G)$, identifying the dual as a warped conformal field theory.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the same solution phase space construction is applied to other bumblebee black holes, such as the Schwarzschild-like or Kerr-like solutions listed in the paper's introduction, their mass and angular momentum should acquire the same kind of $\sqrt{1+s}$ factors and their entropy factors of $1+s$; the paper only speculates about such modifications, so this is a testable extension.
  • The near-horizon Virasoro-Kac-Moody algebra suggests that a warped entropy-counting formula, not derived in the paper, could reproduce the near-horizon entropy and would provide a sharper test of the proposed warped CFT dual.
  • One can isolate how much of the entropy match is physical by testing whether the extra $\sqrt{1+s}$ factor can be absorbed into a rescaled central charge or a rescaled temperature; if it can, the holographic dictionary in bumblebee gravity would differ from pure AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ in a precise way.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper applies the solution phase space method (SPSM) to Einstein-bumblebee gravity in three dimensions, computes the conserved charges of the rotating BTZ-like bumblebee black hole, verifies the first law of thermodynamics, and studies the asymptotic symmetry algebra. The authors obtain mass, angular momentum, and entropy that depend on the Lorentz-violating parameter, derive two Virasoro copies with central charge c = 3 sqrt(1+s) l/G, and attempt to reproduce the SPSM entropy using the Cardy formula. In the near-horizon extremal geometry, they impose Detournay-Smoes-Wutte boundary conditions and obtain a Virasoro-Kac-Moody U(1) algebra with the same Virasoro central charge.

Significance. If the charge computations are correct, the paper provides a systematic SPSM treatment of a Lorentz-violating black hole and gives a concrete prediction for the LV dependence of the Brown-Henneaux central charge, c = 3 sqrt(1+s) l/G. The first-law consistency check and the explicit charge formulas are useful and appear internally consistent. The claimed exact agreement between the Cardy entropy and the SPSM entropy, however, is not currently established: Eq. (55) inserts an ad hoc factor sqrt(1+s) into the Cardy formula without derivation. With the paper's own values for c and the zero modes, the standard Cardy formula gives S_CFT = pi sqrt(1+s) r_H/G, a factor sqrt(1+s) smaller than the SPSM entropy in Eq. (41). The extra factor is exactly what is needed to manufacture Eq. (57), so the advertised microscopic derivation is, in its present form, a fitted consistency check rather than an independent prediction.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 5.1, Eq. (55)] Eq. (55) is not the Cardy formula: each square-root term carries an extra factor sqrt(1+s), described only as a modification by the LV factor. Using the paper's own central charge c in Eq. (54) and the shifted zero-mode charges from Eq. (52), the unmodified Cardy expression evaluates to pi sqrt(1+s) r_H/G, which is a factor sqrt(1+s) below the SPSM entropy in Eq. (41). The inserted factor in Eq. (55) is precisely the factor required to obtain Eq. (57). No derivation of this modified Cardy formula from modular invariance, from the CFT spectrum, or from the bumblebee CFT data is provided. Moreover, Eq. (55) does not state whether the L0 values are the shifted charges from Eq. (52) or the unshifted charges from Eq. (56); on no reading does the standard Cardy formula produce Eq. (57). This is the load-bearing step for the claim of exact entropy matching, so the abstract's statement that the microscopic entropy precisely matches the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is unsupported as written.
  2. [Sec. 5.2, Eq. (65)] The assumption that tau is periodic with period L in iR is not justified. For a real coordinate tau, the modes e^{2 pi i n tau / L} with L purely imaginary are not periodic functions on the real line, so the mode decomposition in Eq. (65), the integration range 0 to L, and the charge expressions in Eqs. (68)-(69) require a clear interpretation, such as a Euclidean continuation or a contour prescription. Since the level k in Eq. (71) depends on L, and since the central extension terms in Eq. (70) are part of the claimed warped conformal symmetry algebra, the complex periodicity assumption needs a derivation or at least a consistency check before the near-horizon algebra can be accepted.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 4, text after Eq. (33)] "Out horizon" should be "outer horizon."
  2. [Sec. 5.1, Eq. (55)] The "+" and "-" signs in Eq. (55) are nonstandard for the sum of left- and right-moving Cardy contributions; the formula should state explicitly that the two terms are added, and the sign notation should be removed or explained.
  3. [Sec. 5.1, Eq. (45)] The Brown-Henneaux boundary condition matrix in Eq. (45) is difficult to read because of the line breaks; it should be typeset as a standard 3x3 matrix with entries explicitly aligned.
  4. [Sec. 3, text near Eq. (17)] The phrase "there is no bumblebee field frosted at its vacuum expectation value" is confusing, since the solution below sets B_mu = b_mu; this wording should be clarified.
  5. [References] Reference [5] cites Maldacena and Strominger rather than the standard AdS/CFT correspondence reference; the citation seems misplaced for the statement being supported.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 7.0 of 10

The Cardy-formula prefactor in Eq. (55) is inserted by hand and is exactly the factor needed to force S_CFT to equal the SPSM Bekenstein-Hawking entropy.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 5.1, Eq. (55); compare with Eqs. (41), (54), and (56)]
    "By using the Cardy formula [60, 69], and modified by the LV factor √1 +s, the microscopic entropy of the dual CFT is SCFT = 2π(√1 +s) r c/6(L− 0 − c/24) ± 2π(√1 +s) r c/6(L+ 0 − c/24), (55)"

    The extra factor √(1+s) is not derived from modular invariance or any CFT datum; it is chosen precisely to make the Cardy result match the already computed SPSM entropy. Inserting the paper's own c = 3√(1+s)l/G (Eq. 54) and zero modes (Eq. 56) into the standard Cardy formula yields S_CFT = π√(1+s) r_H/G, whereas the claimed Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is S_H = (1+s)π r_H/G (Eq. 41). The ratio of the target entropy to the standard Cardy result is √(1+s), so the added prefactor is exactly the missing factor. Thus the 'precise agreement' in Eq. (57) is manufactured by the modified formula rather than predicted independently.

full rationale

The conserved charges M, J, and S are direct SPSM integrals over the exact solution, and the first law is a consistency check; those parts are not circular. The asymptotic Virasoro algebra and central charge are obtained by a standard boundary-condition computation and are self-contained. The circular element is specifically the microscopic entropy match: Eq. (55) multiplies the Cardy formula by an unexplained √(1+s). With the paper's own c and L0 values, the unmodified Cardy formula gives S = π√(1+s) r_H/G, while the SPSM entropy is (1+s)π r_H/G; the inserted factor supplies exactly the missing √(1+s). Because no CFT-level justification is given, the claimed exact match between microscopic and Bekenstein-Hawking entropies reduces by construction to this fitted prefactor. This affects the central holographic claim, so the circularity score is elevated, though the rest of the charge analysis remains independent.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the bumblebee solution from prior work, on the boundary-condition phase space, and on a Cardy formula modified by an unexplained sqrt(1+s) factor. No new particles, fields, or conserved quantities are introduced by this paper.

free parameters (2)
  • s (Lorentz-violating parameter)
    Input model parameter rho b0^2 from the bumblebee solution of Ref. [37]; not fitted here, but every central result carries a factor sqrt(1+s) or (1+s).
  • L (period of tau in near-horizon section)
    Assumed periodic coordinate tau with period L in iR to define Virasoro-Kac-Moody modes; L appears in the Kac-Moody level k and is chosen by hand without physical justification.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The BTZ-like bumblebee solution (33) satisfies the Einstein-bumblebee field equations (21).
    The paper takes the solution from Ref. [37] without re-deriving or verifying the EOM; all subsequent charges depend on this solution.
  • domain assumption The Brown-Henneaux boundary conditions (45) together with the B_mu boundary conditions (46) define a consistent phase space with vanishing symplectic current on-shell.
    The asymptotic Killing vectors (47) preserve these boundary conditions, but the paper does not prove that the symplectic current vanishes for the bumblebee field, which the SPSM charge algebra requires.
  • ad hoc to paper The Cardy formula applies to the dual CFT with an extra sqrt(1+s) prefactor as written in Eq. (55).
    The LV factor in the Cardy formula is asserted without derivation and is chosen so that S_CFT equals the SPSM Bekenstein-Hawking entropy.
  • ad hoc to paper The period L of tau is purely imaginary, L in iR, so that the mode expansions in Eq. (65) are well defined.
    No physical or boundary-condition argument is given for an imaginary period; the Kac-Moody level k = sqrt(1+s) L^2 mu/(4 pi^2 G) depends on this choice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Conserved charges and asymptotic symmetries of BTZ-like black holes in Einstein-bumblebee gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3WMVZFVE

@misc{pith2026250413985,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Conserved charges and asymptotic symmetries of BTZ-like black holes in Einstein-bumblebee gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3WMVZFVE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13985}
}
abstract

Using the solution phase space method, we investigate the conserved charges of BTZ-like black holes in Einstein-bumblebee gravity. Our study shows that the black hole mass, angular momentum and entropy are influenced by the Lorentz-violating parameter. Through the study of the AdS/CFT correspondence, we derive the asymptotic charge algebra, which consists of two copies of the Virasoro algebra with non-trivial central charges. By employing the Cardy formula, we calculate the microscopic entropy of dual conformal field theory, which precisely matches with the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy. Furthermore, by imposing the Detournay-Smoes-Wutte boundary conditions in the near horizon geometry of the extremal BTZ-like black hole, we obtain a Virasoro-Kac-Moody $\mathrm{U(1)}$ algebra, representing the symmetry algebra of a warped conformal field theory.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [37]

    Rotating BTZ-like black hole and central charges in Einstein-bumblebee gravity,

    C. Ding, Y. Shi, J. Chen, Y. Zhou, C. Liu and Y. Xiao, “Rotating BTZ-like black hole and central charges in Einstein-bumblebee gravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) no.7, 573 [arXiv:2302.01580 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [1]

    Invariant Variation Problems,

    E. Noether, “Invariant Variation Problems,” Gott. Nachr. 1918 (1918), 235-257 [arXiv:physics/0503066 [physics]]. 16

    arXiv 1918

  3. [2]

    Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,

    H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Burg and A. W. K. Metzner, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 269 (1962), 21-52

    work page 1962

  4. [3]

    Gravitational waves in general relativity. 8. Waves in asymptotically flat space-times,

    R. K. Sachs, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 8. Waves in asymptotically flat space-times,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 270 (1962), 103-126

    work page 1962

  5. [4]

    Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymp- totic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity,

    J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux, “Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymp- totic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity,” Commun. Math. Phys. 104 (1986), 207-226

    work page 1986

  6. [5]

    AdS(3) black holes and a stringy exclusion principle,

    J. M. Maldacena and A. Strominger, “AdS(3) black holes and a stringy exclusion principle,” JHEP 12 (1998), 005 [arXiv:hep-th/9804085 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1998

  7. [6]

    The Black hole in three-dimensional space- time,

    M. Banados, C. Teitelboim and J. Zanelli, “The Black hole in three-dimensional space- time,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 (1992), 1849-1851 [arXiv:hep-th/9204099 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1992

  8. [7]

    Geometry of the (2+1) black hole,

    M. Banados, M. Henneaux, C. Teitelboim and J. Zanelli, “Geometry of the (2+1) black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993), 1506-1525 [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013), 069902] [arXiv:gr-qc/9302012 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv 1993

Show all 69 references
  1. [8]

    Black hole entropy from near horizon microstates,

    A. Strominger, “Black hole entropy from near horizon microstates,” JHEP 02 (1998), 009 [arXiv:hep-th/9712251 [hep-th]]

    1998 arXiv

  2. [9]

    The Kerr/CFT Correspondence,

    M. Guica, T. Hartman, W. Song and A. Strominger, “The Kerr/CFT Correspondence,” Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009), 124008 [arXiv:0809.4266 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Warped Conformal Field Theory,

    S. Detournay, T. Hartman and D. M. Hofman, “Warped Conformal Field Theory,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012), 124018 [arXiv:1210.0539 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Advanced Lectures on General Relativity,

    G. Comp` ere and A. Fiorucci, “Advanced Lectures on General Relativity,” [arXiv:1801.07064 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  5. [12]

    Conserved Charges in Extended Theories of Gravity,

    H. Adami, M. R. Setare, T. C. Sisman and B. Tekin, “Conserved Charges in Extended Theories of Gravity,” Phys. Rept. 834 (2019), 1 [arXiv:1710.07252 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Surface Charges Toolkit for Gravity,

    E. Frodden and D. Hidalgo, “Surface Charges Toolkit for Gravity,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29 (2020) no.06, 2050040 [arXiv:1911.07264 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Local symmetries and constraints,

    J. Lee and R. M. Wald, “Local symmetries and constraints,” J. Math. Phys. 31 (1990), 725-743

    1990

  8. [15]

    Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,

    R. M. Wald, “Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,” Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) no.8, R3427-R3431 [arXiv:gr-qc/9307038 [gr-qc]]

    1993 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Some properties of Noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy,

    V. Iyer and R. M. Wald, “Some properties of Noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy,” Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994), 846-864 [arXiv:gr-qc/9403028 [gr-qc]]

    1994 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Solution Phase Space and Conserved Charges: A General Formulation for Charges Associated with Exact Symmetries,

    K. Hajian and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Solution Phase Space and Conserved Charges: A General Formulation for Charges Associated with Exact Symmetries,” Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) no.4, 044074 [arXiv:1512.05584 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Conserved charges and first law of thermodynamics for Kerr–de Sitter black holes,

    K. Hajian, “Conserved charges and first law of thermodynamics for Kerr–de Sitter black holes,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 48 (2016) no.8, 114 [arXiv:1602.05575 [gr-qc]]. 17

    2016 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Revisiting Conserved Charges in Higher Cur- vature Gravitational Theories,

    M. Ghodrati, K. Hajian and M. R. Setare, “Revisiting Conserved Charges in Higher Cur- vature Gravitational Theories,” Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) no.12, 701 [arXiv:1606.04353 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Entropies and The First Laws of Black Hole Thermody- namics in Einstein-aether-Maxwell Theory,

    H. F. Ding and X. H. Zhai, “Entropies and The First Laws of Black Hole Thermody- namics in Einstein-aether-Maxwell Theory,” Class. Quant. Grav. 37 (2020) no.18, 185015 [arXiv:2001.06261 [gr-qc]]

    2020 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Notes on solution phase space and BTZ black hole,

    W. Guo, “Notes on solution phase space and BTZ black hole,” Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) no.11, 1198 [arXiv:2411.14247 [gr-qc]]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Modern tests of Lorentz invariance,

    D. Mattingly, “Modern tests of Lorentz invariance,” Living Rev. Rel. 8 (2005), 5 [arXiv:gr- qc/0502097 [gr-qc]]

    2005

  16. [23]

    Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,

    P. Horava, “Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,” Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009), 084008 [arXiv:0901.3775 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Ghost condensation and a consistent infrared modification of gravity,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, H. C. Cheng, M. A. Luty and S. Mukohyama, “Ghost condensation and a consistent infrared modification of gravity,” JHEP 05 (2004), 074 [arXiv:hep-th/0312099 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  18. [25]

    String theoretic bounds on Lorentz violating warped compactification,

    A. R. Frey, “String theoretic bounds on Lorentz violating warped compactification,” JHEP 04 (2003), 012 [arXiv:hep-th/0301189 [hep-th]]

    2003 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Asymmetrically warped compactifications and gravitational Lorentz violation,

    J. M. Cline and L. Valcarcel, “Asymmetrically warped compactifications and gravitational Lorentz violation,” JHEP 03 (2004), 032 [arXiv:hep-ph/0312245 [hep-ph]]

    2004 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Gravity with a dynamical preferred frame,

    T. Jacobson and D. Mattingly, “Gravity with a dynamical preferred frame,” Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001), 024028 [arXiv:gr-qc/0007031 [gr-qc]]

    2001 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Einstein-Aether theory,

    C. Eling, T. Jacobson and D. Mattingly, “Einstein-Aether theory,” [arXiv:gr-qc/0410001 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv

  22. [29]

    Einstein-aether gravity: A Status report,

    T. Jacobson, “Einstein-aether gravity: A Status report,” PoS QG-PH (2007), 020 [arXiv:0801.1547 [gr-qc]]

    2007 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Spontaneous Breaking of Lorentz Symmetry in String Theory,

    V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, “Spontaneous Breaking of Lorentz Symmetry in String Theory,” Phys. Rev. D 39 (1989), 683

    1989

  24. [31]

    Gravitational Phenomenology in Higher Dimensional Theories and Strings,

    V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, “Gravitational Phenomenology in Higher Dimensional Theories and Strings,” Phys. Rev. D 40 (1989), 1886-1903

    1989

  25. [32]

    Gravity, Lorentz violation, and the standard model,

    V. A. Kostelecky, “Gravity, Lorentz violation, and the standard model,” Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004), 105009 [arXiv:hep-th/0312310 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Matter-gravity couplings and Lorentz violation,

    A. V. Kostelecky and J. D. Tasson, “Matter-gravity couplings and Lorentz violation,” Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011), 016013 [arXiv:1006.4106 [gr-qc]]

    2011 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Exact Schwarzschild-like solution in a bumblebee gravity model,

    R. Casana, A. Cavalcante, F. P. Poulis and E. B. Santos, “Exact Schwarzschild-like solution in a bumblebee gravity model,” Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) no.10, 104001 [arXiv:1711.02273 [gr-qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Black holes with a cosmological constant in bumblebee gravity,

    R. V. Maluf and J. C. S. Neves, “Black holes with a cosmological constant in bumblebee gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) no.4, 044002 [arXiv:2011.12841 [gr-qc]]. 18

    2021 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Exact Kerr-like solution and its shadow in a gravity model with spontaneous Lorentz symmetry breaking,

    C. Ding, C. Liu, R. Casana and A. Cavalcante, “Exact Kerr-like solution and its shadow in a gravity model with spontaneous Lorentz symmetry breaking,” Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) no.3, 178 [arXiv:1910.02674 [gr-qc]]

    2020 arXiv

  30. [38]

    G¨ odel solution in the bumblebee gravity,

    A. F. Santos, A. Y. Petrov, W. D. R. Jesus and J. R. Nascimento, “G¨ odel solution in the bumblebee gravity,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A 30 (2015) no.02, 1550011 [arXiv:1407.5985 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Bumblebee gravity with a Kerr-Sen-like solution and its Shadow,

    S. K. Jha and A. Rahaman, “Bumblebee gravity with a Kerr-Sen-like solution and its Shadow,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) no.4, 345 [arXiv:2011.14916 [gr-qc]]

    2021 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Vacuum solution within a metric-affine bumblebee gravity,

    A. A. A. Filho, J. R. Nascimento, A. Y. Petrov and P. J. Porf´ ırio, “Vacuum solution within a metric-affine bumblebee gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) no.8, 085010 [arXiv:2211.11821 [gr-qc]]

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Static spherical vacuum solutions in the bumblebee gravity model,

    R. Xu, D. Liang and L. Shao, “Static spherical vacuum solutions in the bumblebee gravity model,” Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) no.2, 024011 [arXiv:2209.02209 [gr-qc]]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Charged spherically symmetric and slowly rotating charged black hole solutions in bumblebee gravity,

    J. Z. Liu, W. D. Guo, S. W. Wei and Y. X. Liu, “Charged spherically symmetric and slowly rotating charged black hole solutions in bumblebee gravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C 85 (2025) no.2, 145 [arXiv:2407.08396 [gr-qc]]

    2025 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Gravitational lensing under the effect of Weyl and bumblebee gravities: Applications of Gauss–Bonnet theorem,

    A. Ovg¨ un, K. Jusufi and I. Sakalli, “Gravitational lensing under the effect of Weyl and bumblebee gravities: Applications of Gauss–Bonnet theorem,” Annals Phys. 399 (2018), 193-203 [arXiv:1805.09431 [gr-qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Quasinormal frequencies for a black hole in a bumblebee gravity,

    R. Oliveira, D. M. Dantas and C. A. S. Almeida, “Quasinormal frequencies for a black hole in a bumblebee gravity,” EPL 135 (2021) no.1, 10003 [arXiv:2105.07956 [gr-qc]]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    GUP Modified Hawking Radiation in Bumblebee Gravity,

    S. Kanzi and ˙I. Sakallı, “GUP Modified Hawking Radiation in Bumblebee Gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B 946 (2019), 114703 [arXiv:1905.00477 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Shadow cast by Kerr-like black hole in the presence of plasma in Einstein-bumblebee gravity,

    H. M. Wang and S. W. Wei, “Shadow cast by Kerr-like black hole in the presence of plasma in Einstein-bumblebee gravity,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137 (2022) no.5, 571 [arXiv:2106.14602 [gr-qc]]

    2022 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Investigating rotating black holes in bum- blebee gravity: insights from EHT observations,

    S. U. Islam, S. G. Ghosh and S. D. Maharaj, “Investigating rotating black holes in bum- blebee gravity: insights from EHT observations,” JCAP 12 (2024), 047 [arXiv:2410.05395 [gr-qc]]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Shadows and parameter estimation of rotating quantum corrected black holes and constraints from EHT observation of M87* and Sgr A*,

    H. Ali, S. U. Islam and S. G. Ghosh, “Shadows and parameter estimation of rotating quantum corrected black holes and constraints from EHT observation of M87* and Sgr A*,” JHEAp 47 (2025), 100367 [arXiv:2410.09198 [gr-qc]]

    2025 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Testing black holes with cosmo- logical constant in Einstein-bumblebee gravity through the black hole shadow using EHT data and deflection angle,

    R. C. Pantig, S. Kala, A. ¨Ovg¨ un and N. J. L. S. Lobos, “Testing black holes with cosmo- logical constant in Einstein-bumblebee gravity through the black hole shadow using EHT data and deflection angle,” [arXiv:2410.13661 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv

  42. [50]

    Thin accretion disk around a rotating Kerr-like black hole in Einstein-bumblebee gravity model,

    C. Liu, C. Ding and J. Jing, “Thin accretion disk around a rotating Kerr-like black hole in Einstein-bumblebee gravity model,” [arXiv:1910.13259 [gr-qc]]. 19

    1910 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Superradiant instability of a Kerr-like black hole in Einstein-bumblebee gravity,

    R. Jiang, R. H. Lin and X. H. Zhai, “Superradiant instability of a Kerr-like black hole in Einstein-bumblebee gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) no.12, 124004 [arXiv:2108.04702 [gr-qc]]

    2021 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Constraint on parameters of a rotating black hole in Einstein-bumblebee theory by quasi-periodic oscillations,

    Z. Wang, S. Chen and J. Jing, “Constraint on parameters of a rotating black hole in Einstein-bumblebee theory by quasi-periodic oscillations,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) no.6, 528 [arXiv:2112.02895 [gr-qc]]

    2022 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Probing bumblebee gravity with black hole X-ray data,

    J. Gu, S. Riaz, A. B. Abdikamalov, D. Ayzenberg and C. Bambi, “Probing bumblebee gravity with black hole X-ray data,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) no.8, 708 [arXiv:2206.14733 [gr-qc]]

    2022 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Spontaneous Lorentz and Diffeomorphism Violation, Massive Modes, and Gravity,

    R. Bluhm, S. H. Fung and V. A. Kostelecky, “Spontaneous Lorentz and Diffeomorphism Violation, Massive Modes, and Gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008), 065020 [arXiv:0712.4119 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Semi-classical central charge in topologically massive grav- ity,

    G. Compere and S. Detournay, “Semi-classical central charge in topologically massive grav- ity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 26 (2009), 012001 [erratum: Class. Quant. Grav. 26 (2009), 139801] [arXiv:0808.1911 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Boundary conditions for spacelike and timelike warped AdS3 spaces in topologically massive gravity,

    G. Compere and S. Detournay, “Boundary conditions for spacelike and timelike warped AdS3 spaces in topologically massive gravity,” JHEP 08 (2009), 092 [arXiv:0906.1243 [hep- th]]

    2009 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Asymptotic structure of topologically massive gravity in spacelike stretched AdS sector,

    M. Blagojevic and B. Cvetkovic, “Asymptotic structure of topologically massive gravity in spacelike stretched AdS sector,” JHEP 09 (2009), 006 [arXiv:0907.0950 [gr-qc]]

    2009 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Boundary conditions for extremal black holes from 2d gravity,

    S. Detournay, T. Smoes and R. Wutte, “Boundary conditions for extremal black holes from 2d gravity,” SciPost Phys. 16 (2024) no.5, 141 [arXiv:2312.08353 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  51. [59]

    New boundary conditions for AdS 2,

    V. Godet and C. Marteau, “New boundary conditions for AdS 2,” JHEP 12 (2020), 020 [arXiv:2005.08999 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Operator Content of Two-Dimensional Conformally Invariant Theories,

    J. L. Cardy, “Operator Content of Two-Dimensional Conformally Invariant Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B 270 (1986), 186-204

    1986

  53. [61]

    Warped AdS(3) Black Holes,

    D. Anninos, W. Li, M. Padi, W. Song and A. Strominger, “Warped AdS(3) Black Holes,” JHEP 03 (2009), 130 [arXiv:0807.3040 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  54. [62]

    The Extreme Kerr throat geometry: A Vacuum analog of AdS(2) x S**2,

    J. M. Bardeen and G. T. Horowitz, “The Extreme Kerr throat geometry: A Vacuum analog of AdS(2) x S**2,” Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999), 104030 [arXiv:hep-th/9905099 [hep-th]]

    1999 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Warped Conformal Field Theory as Lower Spin Gravity,

    D. M. Hofman and B. Rollier, “Warped Conformal Field Theory as Lower Spin Gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B 897 (2015), 1-38 [arXiv:1411.0672 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Warped Symmetries of the Kerr Black Hole,

    A. Aggarwal, A. Castro and S. Detournay, “Warped Symmetries of the Kerr Black Hole,” JHEP 01 (2020), 016 [arXiv:1909.03137 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Warped Flatland,

    S. Detournay, W. Merbis, G. S. Ng and R. Wutte, “Warped Flatland,” JHEP 11 (2020), 061 [arXiv:2001.00020 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Warped CFT duals of the Pleba´ nski-Demia´ nski family of solutions,

    X. Jiang and J. Xu, “Warped CFT duals of the Pleba´ nski-Demia´ nski family of solutions,” JHEP 10 (2024), 089 [arXiv:2405.10061 [hep-th]]. 20

    2024 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Surface charge algebra in gauge theories and thermodynamic integrability,

    G. Barnich and G. Compere, “Surface charge algebra in gauge theories and thermodynamic integrability,” J. Math. Phys. 49 (2008), 042901 [arXiv:0708.2378 [gr-qc]]

    2008 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Symmetries and conservation laws in Lagrangian gauge theories with applica- tions to the mechanics of black holes and to gravity in three dimensions,

    G. Compere, “Symmetries and conservation laws in Lagrangian gauge theories with applica- tions to the mechanics of black holes and to gravity in three dimensions,” [arXiv:0708.3153 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  61. [69]

    Near Horizon Limits of Massless BTZ and Their CFT Duals,

    J. de Boer, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and J. Simon, “Near Horizon Limits of Massless BTZ and Their CFT Duals,” Class. Quant. Grav. 28 (2011), 175012 [arXiv:1011.1897 [hep-th]]. 21

    2011 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.