Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Gravitational perturbations of a regular T-duality inspired black hole: Quasinormal modes, excitation factors, and time-domain evolution

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For a regular black hole built from a zero-point length, gravitational ringdown oscillates faster as the core size grows, with damping staying nearly flat.

desk verdict A clean, honest numerical data product for axial gravitational QNMs of one regular black hole; main caveat is the S=U=0 closure, which the authors themselves flag, and the absence of a continued-fraction check for overtones. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.07715 v2 pith:H3XNOZY5 submitted 2026-07-03 gr-qc hep-th

Bekir Can Lütfüoğlu , Mardon Abdullaev , Javlon Rayimbaev , Shokhzod Jumaniyozov , Shavkat Karshiboev This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qchep-th MSC 83C5783C3583C25 PACS 04.70.-s04.30.-w
keywords regularblackholeszero-pointlengthquasinormalmodesgravitationalperturbationsringdownaxialsemiclassicalexpansionexcitationfactors
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper sets out to show that the zero-point length that removes the central singularity of a Schwarzschild-like black hole leaves a specific, monotonic imprint on the gravitational ringdown: measured in units of the mass as seen at infinity (the ADM mass), the real parts of the fundamental quasinormal frequencies for the ℓ=2,3,4 gravitational modes grow steadily as the zero-point length increases, so the hole rings faster than Schwarzschild, while the damping rate rises slightly and then falls as the geometry approaches an extremal configuration. The same length scale controls both the size of the regular core and the deformation of the exterior potential, so the ringing spectrum becomes a direct probe of how the singularity is resolved. The frequencies are computed with a high-order semiclassical expansion resummed by rational approximants and are checked against direct time-domain evolution, with agreement at the level of 10⁻³ percent; the late-time decay still follows the standard power law t^{-(2ℓ+3)}. A sympathetic reader would care because gravitational modes are the sector that actually appears in black-hole ringdown observations, making this a testable fingerprint of singularity resolution.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the effective potential for axial gravitational waves, V_ℓ(r) = f(r)[ℓ(ℓ+1)/r² − 6m(r)/r³ + 4π(ρ − p_r)], whose shape is set by the metric function f(r) and mass function m(r) of the regularized geometry; these are built from a smeared matter density plus a gravitational self-energy density, both controlled by the zero-point length. The reduction to a single potential relies on closing the odd-parity matter variables by assuming the effective medium has no independent axial motion. The spectrum is obtained from a high-order expansion around the potential peak with rational-function resummation, cross-checked by a null-grid time-domain integration and a damped-expon

What would settle it

An independent calculation of the ℓ=2 overtones using a continued-fraction method (or a direct solution of the coupled axial matter-gravity system) would settle whether the third-overtone turnover near the largest zero-point length is physical. Observationally, a detected ringdown whose quadrupole frequency does not increase with respect to the inferred mass would contradict the monotonic shift predicted here.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that odd-parity gravitational perturbations of the T-duality-inspired regular black hole reduce to a single wave equation with an effective potential built from the regularized metric function and mass profile, and that turning on the zero-point length raises the height of that potential barrier. Consequently, in ADM-mass units the real parts of the fundamental quasinormal frequencies for ℓ=2,3,4 increase monotonically with the zero-point length up to the near-extremal value, the damping rates reach a shallow maximum and then decrease, and the excitation factors (the residues of the Green function at the poles) change only mildly, preserving the ordering |B20|>|B30|>|B40

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the smeared matter distribution responsible for the regular core cannot move on its own in the odd-parity sector, which allows the perturbation to be compressed into a single wave equation; if that distribution has independent axial dynamics, the single-equation description is incomplete.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim is right, the gravitational ringdown of this regular black hole is unambiguously faster than Schwarzschild's for the same mass as measured at infinity, with the frequency shift growing monotonically with the zero-point length up to near extremality.
  • The damping rate is not a monotonic probe: it rises slightly for small deformations and then falls as the horizon approaches extremality, so damping alone would not cleanly distinguish the model from Schwarzschild.
  • The excitation factors stay nearly constant over the deformation range, so the relative strength of the ℓ=2 fundamental mode (the strongest of the three) is preserved, and amplitude priors for ringdown searches would barely shift.
  • The late-time decay exponent is unchanged, t^{-(2ℓ+3)}, meaning the regular core leaves no imprint on the asymptotic tail within the simulated window.
  • For ℓ=2, the first two overtones keep the monotonic real-part trend, while the third overtone turns over near extremality, suggesting higher overtones become sensitive to the shape of the barrier near the horizon.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the quadrupole gravitational mode is the dominant ringdown observable, the monotonic frequency shift is a candidate fingerprint for testing singularity resolution with gravitational waves; a Bayesian analysis using the tabulated frequencies could set upper bounds on the zero-point length from a detected ringdown.
  • The single-potential reduction rests on a modeling closure; if the smeared matter source has its own independent axial motion, the true spectrum could differ, especially for overtones. A full coupled matter-gravity perturbation calculation would test whether the tabulated values describe the physical branch.
  • The third-overtone turnover near extremality, if confirmed by an independent method, would provide a sharper near-horizon probe than the fundamental mode, since it depends on higher-derivative details of the potential barrier.
  • A natural next step is to compute the polar gravitational sector or the transmission probabilities (grey-body factors) for the same background, to see whether the zero-point length's imprint is universal across perturbation channels or specific to axial modes.
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 studies axial gravitational perturbations of the regular black hole constructed by Jusufi and Singleton, in which a non-local, T-duality-inspired zero-point length l0 regularizes the source and the gravitational self-energy. The authors derive a Regge–Wheeler-type master equation (Eq. 19) with the effective potential of Eq. (20), using the explicit closure δs_μ = 0 (S = U = 0) for the axial perturbations of the effective anisotropic fluid. They compute quasinormal frequencies for ℓ = 2,3,4 fundamentals and ℓ = 2 overtones with 14th- and 16th-order WKB–Padé methods, cross-check two fundamental modes against time-domain Prony extraction, and compute the corresponding excitation factors. In ADM-scaled variables, they find that the real oscillation frequencies increase monotonically with l0/MADM up to the near-extremal value 0.85, while the damping rates first increase slightly and then decrease; the n = 3 overtone real part turns over between l0 = 0.80 and 0.85. The near-Schwarzschild limit reproduces the standard Regge–Wheeler frequencies to about 0.36%, and the late-time tails follow Price's law.

Significance. If the S = U = 0 closure is accepted, the paper provides a concrete, internally consistent prediction for the gravitational ringdown of this regular black-hole model. The numerical work is careful: two high-order WKB–Padé orders agree to better than 0.6% (usually far less), the time-domain Prony extraction matches the WKB fundamentals to ~10^-3%, and the Schwarzschild limit is correctly recovered. The excitation factors are a useful complementary dataset with a clearly stated normalization convention. However, the central physical claim — that the zero-point length makes gravitational ringdown oscillate faster — rests on a modeling choice, the δs_μ = 0 closure, that is explicitly acknowledged but not derived from the non-local theory. The paper is transparent about this limitation, but the abstract and conclusions present the results as the gravitational-mode spectrum without the caveat. This conditional status is the main factor limiting the strength of the conclusion.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. II, Eq. (20); Abstract] The central claim that l0 raises the axial barrier and shifts the gravitational QNM spectrum monotonically is established only under the closure δs_μ = 0 (S = U = 0). The manuscript itself states that if the effective anisotropic fluid has independent axial dynamics, S and U must be retained, leading to a coupled matter–gravity eigenvalue problem rather than the single potential in Eq. (20). Since the background source is an effective fluid representing gravitational self-energy, this closure is not a consequence of the non-local action Eq. (5) or of the background equations; it is an ansatz. Yet the abstract and conclusions present the results as 'gravitational modes' without this caveat. Because every reported frequency, the monotonic trend, and the excitation factors depend on this potential, this is a load-bearing point. I recommend either deriving the closure from the underlying the
  2. [Sec. IV, Fig. 4, Table II] The n = 3 overtone real part turns over between l0 = 0.80 and 0.85, and the authors attribute this to near-extremal barrier shape. The two Padé orders agree to about 0.16% at l0 = 0.85, which is larger than the agreement for the fundamental modes, and the effect itself is 2.5%. The manuscript already notes that an independent continued-fraction calculation would be a useful check. Given that the overtone turnover is presented as a finding, the statement would be strengthened by actually performing the Leaver calculation or by explicitly labeling the turnover as provisional pending an independent method. This is not blocking for the fundamental-mode claim, but it should be addressed in revision.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title] Typo: 'T-dulatiy' should be 'T-duality' in the title.
  2. [Figs. 5 and 6] The y-axis labels appear as '10/Minus15', '10/Minus12', etc., which is a rendering artifact. The figures should use standard scientific notation (e.g., 10^-15).
  3. [References] References [50] and [156] are the same work (Skvortsova, arXiv:2606.15785). Please merge or disambiguate.
  4. [Table I] In several rows of the 'difference' column the entry is formatted as '0. × 10-4%' or '0. × 10-4%' with a leading zero and no digit after the decimal; this is likely a display artifact and should be cleaned.
  5. [Sec. V, Eq. (32)] The tortoise-coordinate normalization convention is clearly stated, which is good. It would help the reader to explicitly note that the excitation factors in Table III are dimensionless only after this convention is fixed, as is done in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: QNMs are computed from a fixed externally sourced potential, benchmarked against the Schwarzschild limit; self-citations are peripheral.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the sense that matters for circularity. The metric is imported from Jusufi and Singleton [48] (not a self-citation), and the axial potential in Eq. (20) is taken from the external derivations [63-66] as a direct specialization to g_tt = -1/g_rr = -f(r). The WKB-Pade and time-domain algorithms are standard methods cited to [74-81] and [108]. No component of the target spectrum - neither the quasinormal frequencies nor the excitation factors - is used as an input or fitted parameter. Eq. (19) is solved with a fixed potential V_l(r), and Tables I-III report the resulting eigenvalues and residues. The time-domain/Prony evolution integrates the same master equation, so it is a numerical cross-check of the same boundary-value problem rather than an independent physical datum; that is not circularity. The Schwarzschild-limit comparison in Sec. V ('we recover the Schwarzschild values of excitation factors') is an external benchmark. The one genuinely load-bearing caveat is the explicit closure in Sec. II: 'The approximation used here is precisely delta s_mu = 0, or S(r) = 0' and later 'If the effective anisotropic medium has independent axial dynamics, S and U must be retained and supplemented by constitutive equations, leading to a coupled matter-gravity eigenvalue problem rather than the single potential in Eq. (20).' That is a stated modeling assumption/scope limitation, not a circular reduction: it limits the gravitational claim to the metric-led branch with S = U = 0, but it does not make the computed frequencies equal by construction to any fitted quantity. The self-citations ([49], [71], [72], [85], [102], [107], [120], [125], [139], [154], [155], [158]) are methodological or follow-up references; none supplies a uniqueness theorem or the central potential. Score 2 reflects peripheral self-citations and the explicit but non-circular closure; no prediction reduces to an input.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The metric and axial potential are imported from prior literature ([48], [63,64]); the only varied physical parameter is the zero-point length l0, which is scanned rather than fitted. The S=U=0 closure on the anisotropic-fluid perturbations is the paper-specific assumption that could change the spectrum if invalid. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • zero-point length l0 = scanned 0.05-0.85 M (M=1); extremal at ~0.8581
    Model parameter controlling the regular-core size and the departure from Schwarzschild. It is not fitted to data, but is chosen and scanned to generate the spectra; the central claim is a function of this parameter.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Jusufi-Singleton line element (Eq. 11) with mass function (Eq. 10) is the correct spacetime for the non-local T-duality-inspired zero-point-length model.
    The entire QNM calculation starts from this metric (Sec. II); if the underlying non-local gravity construction is not physical, the results do not apply.
  • ad hoc to paper Axial potential V_l(r) = f/r^2 [l(l+1)-2+2f-r f'] from Refs. [63,64] describes the gravitational axial sector for this anisotropic-fluid background with S=U=0 closure.
    The authors adopt the potential from cited derivations and explicitly set delta s_mu = 0; if the fluid has independent axial dynamics, Eq. (20) is incomplete (Sec. II).
  • standard math High-order WKB with Pade resummation (16th/14th order) yields accurate QNMs for this single-barrier potential.
    Standard method; internal consistency between the two Pade orders supports it, but no continued-fraction comparison is provided for overtones (Sec. III A).
  • standard math The Gundlach-Price-Pullin characteristic integration and Prony analysis correctly extract the fundamental frequency from the same master equation.
    Standard numerical diagnostic; used for two configurations only (Sec. III B, IV).
  • standard math The Price-law tail t^{-(2l+3)} holds for this asymptotically flat axial perturbation.
    Observed in the time domain and expected from standard scattering theory (Sec. IV).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gravitational perturbations of a regular T-duality inspired black hole: Quasinormal modes, excitation factors, and time-domain evolution." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H3XNOZY5

@misc{pith2026260707715,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gravitational perturbations of a regular T-duality inspired black hole: Quasinormal modes, excitation factors, and time-domain evolution},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H3XNOZY5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.07715}
}
abstract

We study axial gravitational perturbations of the neutral regular black hole generated by a non-local, T-duality-inspired zero-point length and the associated gravitational self-energy. In this geometry, the usual point source is replaced by a regular core, and the zero-point length controls the departure from the Schwarzschild limit. We compute the fundamental quasinormal modes and several overtones using high-order WKB--Pad\'e methods, and we verify the dominant mode via direct time-domain evolution. When the zero-point length is turned on, the real parts of the ADM-scaled frequencies increase for the gravitational modes with $\ell=2,3,4$, so the ringdown oscillates faster than in the Schwarzschild limit. The damping rates change more gradually: they initially increase slightly and then decrease near the largest deformation values considered here. This behavior is consistent with the effective potential, whose barrier becomes higher as the deformation parameter increases. We also compute the corresponding excitation factors and find that their magnitudes vary much less strongly than the quasinormal frequencies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.07715 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. displays the resulting metric function in ADM-scaled coordinates for representative values used in our analysis, together with the extremal curve at l0 = FIG. 1. Metric function f(r) for M = 1 and representa￾tive zero-point lengths, including the extremal value l0 = 0.8580937. The radial coordinate is normalized by MADM = M + 3πM2 /(32l0). Each subextremal curve has a Cauchy and an event horizon, whereas the extrema… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Two-scale magnetically charged regular black holes from nonlinear electrodynamics and a T-duality-inspired zero-point length

    gr-qc 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A two-parameter regular black hole family is constructed, with an explicit nonlinear electrodynamics source, exact thermodynamic identities, and analytic shadow and plasma-lensing predictions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

157 extracted references · 118 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Berti, V

    E. Berti, V. Cardoso, and A. O. Starinets, Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 163001 (2009) , arXiv:0905.2975 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2009

  2. [2]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 793 (2011) , arXiv:1102.4014 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2011

  3. [3]

    Nollert, Class

    H.-P. Nollert, Class. Quant. Grav. 16, R159 (1999)

    1999

  4. [4]

    K. D. Kokkotas and B. G. Schmidt, Living Rev. Rel. 2, 2 (1999) , arXiv:gr-qc/9909058

    arXiv 1999

  5. [5]

    S. V. Bolokhov and M. Skvortsova, Grav. Cosmol. 31, 423 (2025)

    2025

  6. [6]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, JHEAp 44, 419 (2024), arXiv:2209.00679 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Cardoso, A

    V. Cardoso, A. S. Miranda, E. Berti, H. Witek, and V. T. Zanchin, Phys. Rev. D 79, 064016 (2009) , arXiv:0812.1806 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2009

  8. [8]

    Ayon-Beato and A

    E. Ayon-Beato and A. Garcia, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5056 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9911046

    arXiv 1998

Show all 157 references
  1. [9]

    K. A. Bronnikov, Phys. Rev. D 63, 044005 (2001) , arXiv:gr-qc/0006014

    2001 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Bonanno and M

    A. Bonanno and M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D 62, 043008 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/0002196

    2000 arXiv

  3. [11]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Lett. B 856, 138945 (2024) , arXiv:2404.09063 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    S. A. Hayward, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 031103 (2006) , arXiv:gr-qc/0506126

    2006 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Dymnikova, Gen

    I. Dymnikova, Gen. Rel. Grav. 24, 235 (1992)

    1992

  6. [14]

    Nicolini, A

    P. Nicolini, A. Smailagic, and E. Spallucci, Phys. Lett. B 632, 547 (2006) , arXiv:gr-qc/0510112

    2006 arXiv

  7. [15]

    K. A. Bronnikov, Phys. Rev. D 110, 024021 (2024) , arXiv:2404.14816 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 113, 043011 (2026) , arXiv:2511.03066 [gr-qc]

    2026

  9. [17]

    Spina, Int

    A. Spina, Int. J. Grav. Theor. Phys. 1, 8 (2025) , arXiv:2510.14552 [gr-qc]

    2025

  10. [18]

    A. M. Bonanno, R. A. Konoplya, G. Oglialoro, and A. Spina, JCAP 12, 042 (2025) , arXiv:2509.12469 [gr- qc]

    2025

  11. [19]

    S. V. Bolokhov, K. A. Bronnikov, and M. V. Skvortsova, Grav. Cosmol. 30, 265 (2024) , arXiv:2405.09124 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    C. F. B. Macedo, L. C. B. Crispino, and E. S. de Oliveira, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 25, 1641008 (2016) , 13 arXiv:1605.00123 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Mahdavian Yekta, M

    D. Mahdavian Yekta, M. Karimabadi, and S. A. Alavi, Annals Phys. 434, 168603 (2021) , arXiv:1912.12017 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [22]

    R. A. Konoplya, Z. Stuchlik, A. Zhidenko, and A. F. Zinhailo, Phys. Rev. D 107, 104050 (2023) , arXiv:2303.01987 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Y. Guo, H. Xie, and Y.-G. Miao, Phys. Lett. B 855, 138801 (2024) , arXiv:2402.10406 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    J. Li, K. Lin, and N. Yang, Eur. Phys. J. C 75, 131 (2015), arXiv:1409.5988 [gr-qc]

    2015 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Skvortsova, Grav

    M. Skvortsova, Grav. Cosmol. 30, 279 (2024) , arXiv:2405.15807 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Pedraza, L

    O. Pedraza, L. A. López, R. Arceo, and I. Cabrera- Munguia, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 37, 2250057 (2022) , arXiv:2111.06488 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    S. V. Bolokhov, Annals Phys. 488, 170416 (2026) , arXiv:2511.12859 [gr-qc]

    2026

  20. [28]

    S. V. Bolokhov, Phys. Rev. D 109, 064017 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Skvortsova, (2026), arXiv:2603.28415 [gr-qc]

    M. Skvortsova, (2026), arXiv:2603.28415 [gr-qc]

    2026

  22. [30]

    Pedrotti and S

    D. Pedrotti and S. Vagnozzi, Phys. Rev. D 110, 084075 (2024), arXiv:2404.07589 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Vagnozzi et al

    S. Vagnozzi et al. , Class. Quant. Grav. 40, 165007 (2023), arXiv:2205.07787 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Calzà, D

    M. Calzà, D. Pedrotti, and S. Vagnozzi, Phys. Rev. D 111, 024010 (2025) , arXiv:2409.02807 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    R. A. Konoplya, JCAP 07, 001 (2023) , arXiv:2305.09187 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Flachi and J

    A. Flachi and J. P. S. Lemos, Phys. Rev. D 87, 024034 (2013), arXiv:1211.6212 [gr-qc]

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Arbey, J

    A. Arbey, J. Auffinger, M. Geiller, E. R. Livine, and F. Sartini, Phys. Rev. D 103, 104010 (2021) , arXiv:2101.02951 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  28. [36]

    S. V. Bolokhov, (2026), arXiv:2603.22310 [gr-qc]

    2026

  29. [37]

    A. Held, R. Gold, and A. Eichhorn, JCAP 06, 029 (2019), arXiv:1904.07133 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    D. M. Gingrich, Phys. Rev. D 110, 084045 (2024) , arXiv:2404.04447 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Panotopoulos and Á

    G. Panotopoulos and Á. Rincón, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 134, 300 (2019) , arXiv:1904.10847 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Dubinsky, Int

    A. Dubinsky, Int. J. Grav. Theor. Phys. 2, 6 (2026) , arXiv:2603.17644 [gr-qc]

    2026

  33. [41]

    Skvortsova, EPL 154, 49001 (2026) , arXiv:2509.18061 [gr-qc]

    M. Skvortsova, EPL 154, 49001 (2026) , arXiv:2509.18061 [gr-qc]

    2026

  34. [42]

    Huang, H.-W

    B.-H. Huang, H.-W. Hu, and L. Zhao, JCAP 03, 053 (2024), arXiv:2311.12286 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Y. Yang, D. Liu, Z. Xu, Y. Xing, S. Wu, and Z.-W. Long, Phys. Rev. D 104, 104021 (2021) , arXiv:2107.06554 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Arbey, J

    A. Arbey, J. Auffinger, M. Geiller, E. R. Livine, and F. Sartini, Phys. Rev. D 104, 084016 (2021) , arXiv:2107.03293 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    K. Lin, J. Li, and S. Yang, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 52, 3771 (2013)

    2013

  38. [46]

    L. A. López and V. Ramírez, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 138, 120 (2023) , arXiv:2205.10166 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Arbey, M

    A. Arbey, M. Calzà, L. Malacher, D. Pedrotti, and Y. F. Perez-Gonzalez, Phys. Dark Univ. 53, 102407 (2026) , arXiv:2606.06355 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Jusufi and D

    K. Jusufi and D. Singleton, Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 530 (2026), arXiv:2509.13335 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  41. [49]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, A. Shermatov, S. Murodov, R. Javlon, and M. Umaraliyev, 10.13140/RG.2.2.34442.22726

  42. [51]

    Padmanabhan, Phys

    T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1854 (1997) , arXiv:hep-th/9608182

    1997 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Nicolini, Gen

    P. Nicolini, Gen. Rel. Grav. 54, 106 (2022) , arXiv:2208.05390 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  44. [53]

    Nicolini, E

    P. Nicolini, E. Spallucci, and M. F. Wondrak, Phys. Lett. B 797, 134888 (2019) , arXiv:1902.11242 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [54]

    Gaete, K

    P. Gaete, K. Jusufi, and P. Nicolini, Phys. Lett. B 835, 137546 (2022) , arXiv:2205.15441 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  46. [55]

    Jusufi and P

    K. Jusufi and P. Nicolini, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 1291 (2025), arXiv:2410.19613 [hep-th]

    2025

  47. [56]

    Regular black holes in three dimensions and the zero point length,

    K. Jusufi, “Regular black holes in three dimensions and the zero point length,” (2022), arXiv:2209.04433 [gr- qc]

    2022 arXiv

  48. [57]

    Jusufi, Universe 9, 41 (2023) , arXiv:2301.03590 [gr- qc]

    K. Jusufi, Universe 9, 41 (2023) , arXiv:2301.03590 [gr- qc]

    2023 arXiv

  49. [58]

    F. W. Hehl and B. Mashhoon, Phys. Lett. B 673, 279 (2009), arXiv:0812.1059 [gr-qc]

    2009 arXiv

  50. [59]

    Jusufi, D

    K. Jusufi, D. Singleton, and F. S. N. Lobo, Phys. Lett. B 877, 140475 (2026) , arXiv:2512.15393 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  51. [60]

    Regge and J

    T. Regge and J. A. Wheeler, Phys. Rev. 108, 1063 (1957)

    1957

  52. [61]

    Ashtekar, J

    A. Ashtekar, J. Olmedo, and P. Singh, Phys. Rev. D 98, 126003 (2018) , arXiv:1806.02406 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  53. [62]

    Ashtekar, J

    A. Ashtekar, J. Olmedo, and P. Singh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 241301 (2018) , arXiv:1806.00648 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  54. [63]

    Bouhmadi-López, S

    M. Bouhmadi-López, S. Brahma, C.-Y. Chen, P. Chen, and D.-h. Yeom, JCAP 07, 066 (2020) , arXiv:2004.13061 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  55. [64]

    R. A. Konoplya and O. S. Stashko, Phys. Rev. D 111, 104055 (2025) , arXiv:2408.02578 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  56. [65]

    R. A. Konoplya and O. S. Stashko, Phys. Rev. D 111, 084031 (2025) , arXiv:2502.05689 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  57. [66]

    S. V. Bolokhov and M. Skvortsova, Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 374 (2026) , arXiv:2508.19989 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  58. [67]

    K. A. Bronnikov, R. A. Konoplya, and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 86, 024028 (2012) , arXiv:1205.2224 [gr- qc]

    2012 arXiv

  59. [68]

    Chen and P

    C.-Y. Chen and P. Chen, Phys. Rev. D 99, 104003 (2019), arXiv:1902.01678 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  60. [69]

    Chakraborty, G

    S. Chakraborty, G. Compère, and L. Machet, Phys. Rev. D 112, 024015 (2025) , arXiv:2412.14831 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  61. [70]

    S. V. Bolokhov and M. Skvortsova, Int. J. Grav. Theor. Phys. 1, 3 (2025) , arXiv:2507.07196 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  62. [71]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, J. Rayimbaev, S. Murodov, J. Kur- banov, and M. Matyoqubov, (2026), arXiv:2605.11364 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  63. [72]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, J. Rayimbaev, S. Murodov, M. Ab- dullaev, and M. Akhmedov, (2026), arXiv:2602.20601 [gr-qc]

    2026

  64. [73]

    Quasinormal modes and tidal responses of black holes in generic anisotropic matter environments,

    Y.-Q. Zhao and P. Pani, “Quasinormal modes and tidal responses of black holes in generic anisotropic matter environments,” (2026), arXiv:2606.11380 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  65. [74]

    R. A. Konoplya, A. Zhidenko, and A. F. Zinhailo, Class. Quant. Grav. 36, 155002 (2019) , arXiv:1904.10333 [gr- qc]

    2019 arXiv

  66. [75]

    Iyer and C

    S. Iyer and C. M. Will, Phys. Rev. D 35, 3621 (1987)

    1987

  67. [76]

    R. A. Konoplya, Phys. Rev. D 68, 024018 (2003) , arXiv:gr-qc/0303052

    2003 arXiv

  68. [77]

    Matyjasek and M

    J. Matyjasek and M. Opala, Phys. Rev. D 96, 024011 (2017), arXiv:1704.00361 [gr-qc] . 14

    2017 arXiv

  69. [78]

    Matyjasek and M

    J. Matyjasek and M. Telecka, Phys. Rev. D 100, 124006 (2019), arXiv:1908.09389 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  70. [79]

    Hatsuda, Phys

    Y. Hatsuda, Phys. Rev. D 101, 024008 (2020) , arXiv:1906.07232 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  71. [80]

    Matyjasek, R

    J. Matyjasek, R. A. Konoplya, and A. Zhidenko, Int. J. Grav. Theor. Phys. 2, 5 (2026) , arXiv:2603.12466 [gr- qc]

    2026

  72. [81]

    R. A. Konoplya, J. Matyjasek, and A. Zhidenko, (2026), arXiv:2605.25705 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  73. [82]

    Dubinsky and A

    A. Dubinsky and A. Zinhailo, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 847 (2024), arXiv:2404.01834 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  74. [83]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Lett. B 686, 199 (2010) , arXiv:0909.2138 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  75. [84]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Class. Quant. Grav. 40, 245005 (2023) , arXiv:2309.02560 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  76. [85]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, Phys. Lett. B 872, 140082 (2026) , arXiv:2510.25969 [gr-qc]

    2026

  77. [86]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 82, 084003 (2010) , arXiv:1004.3772 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  78. [87]

    Malik, (2026), arXiv:2605.03659 [gr-qc]

    Z. Malik, (2026), arXiv:2605.03659 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  79. [88]

    Dubinsky, Phys

    A. Dubinsky, Phys. Lett. B 861, 139251 (2025) , arXiv:2409.16569 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  80. [89]

    Kodama, R

    H. Kodama, R. A. Konoplya, and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 81, 044007 (2010) , arXiv:0904.2154 [gr-qc]

    2010 arXiv

  81. [90]

    Malik, EPL 147, 69001 (2024) , arXiv:2410.04306 [gr- qc]

    Z. Malik, EPL 147, 69001 (2024) , arXiv:2410.04306 [gr- qc]

    2024 arXiv

  82. [91]

    Fernando, Gen

    S. Fernando, Gen. Rel. Grav. 48, 24 (2016) , arXiv:1601.06407 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  83. [92]

    H. Guo, H. Liu, X.-M. Kuang, and B. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 102, 124019 (2020) , arXiv:2007.04197 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  84. [93]

    Albuquerque, I

    S. Albuquerque, I. P. Lobo, and V. B. Bezerra, Class. Quant. Grav. 40, 174001 (2023) , arXiv:2301.07746 [gr- qc]

    2023 arXiv

  85. [94]

    Malik, Int

    Z. Malik, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 63, 199 (2024) , arXiv:2308.10412 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  86. [95]

    R. A. Konoplya and R. D. B. Fontana, Phys. Lett. B 659, 375 (2008) , arXiv:0707.1156 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  87. [96]

    Dubinsky, Int

    A. Dubinsky, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 35, 2650009 (2026) , arXiv:2510.11643 [gr-qc]

    2026

  88. [97]

    Dubinsky, Int

    A. Dubinsky, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 65, 45 (2026) , arXiv:2511.00778 [gr-qc]

    2026

  89. [98]

    R. A. Konoplya, Phys. Lett. B 550, 117 (2002) , arXiv:gr-qc/0210105

    2002 arXiv

  90. [99]

    Tan, W.-D

    Q. Tan, W.-D. Guo, and Y.-X. Liu, Phys. Rev. D 106, 044038 (2022) , arXiv:2205.05255 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  91. [100]

    K. D. Kokkotas, R. A. Konoplya, and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 83, 024031 (2011) , arXiv:1011.1843 [gr- qc]

    2011 arXiv

  92. [101]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. F. Zinhailo, Phys. Rev. D 99, 104060 (2019) , arXiv:1904.05341 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  93. [102]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, JCAP 07, 003 (2026) , arXiv:2604.24349 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  94. [103]

    Skvortsova, Annals Phys

    M. Skvortsova, Annals Phys. 492, 170587 (2026) , arXiv:2604.25471 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  95. [104]

    S. V. Bolokhov, (2026), arXiv:2605.11013 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  96. [105]

    S. V. Bolokhov, (2026), arXiv:2605.21533 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  97. [106]

    Skvortsova, (2026), arXiv:2605.12113 [gr-qc]

    M. Skvortsova, (2026), arXiv:2605.12113 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  98. [107]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, Phys. Lett. B 880, 140754 (2026) , arXiv:2606.08351 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  99. [108]

    Gundlach, R

    C. Gundlach, R. H. Price, and J. Pullin, Phys. Rev. D 49, 883 (1994) , arXiv:gr-qc/9307009

    1994 arXiv

  100. [109]

    Momennia, Phys

    M. Momennia, Phys. Rev. D 106, 024052 (2022) , arXiv:2204.03259 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  101. [110]

    Skvortsova, Grav

    M. Skvortsova, Grav. Cosmol. 30, 68 (2024) , arXiv:2311.02729 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  102. [111]

    Aneesh, S

    S. Aneesh, S. Bose, and S. Kar, Phys. Rev. D 97, 124004 (2018), arXiv:1803.10204 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  103. [112]

    Abdalla, O

    E. Abdalla, O. P. F. Piedra, F. S. Nuñez, and J. de Oliveira, Phys. Rev. D 88, 064035 (2013) , arXiv:1211.3390 [gr-qc]

    2013 arXiv

  104. [113]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 90, 064048 (2014) , arXiv:1406.0019 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  105. [114]

    Dubinsky, EPL 147, 19003 (2024) , arXiv:2403.01883 [gr-qc]

    A. Dubinsky, EPL 147, 19003 (2024) , arXiv:2403.01883 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  106. [115]

    R. A. Konoplya, A. Zhidenko, and C. Molina, Phys. Rev. D 75, 084004 (2007) , arXiv:gr-qc/0602047

    2007 arXiv

  107. [116]

    S. V. Bolokhov, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 634 (2024) , arXiv:2404.09364 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  108. [117]

    Malik, Grav

    Z. Malik, Grav. Cosmol. 32, 122 (2026)

    2026

  109. [118]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 89, 024011 (2014) , arXiv:1309.7667 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  110. [119]

    Bolokhov, Eur

    S. Bolokhov, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 1166 (2025)

    2025

  111. [120]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, E. U. Saka, A. Shermatov, J. Ray- imbaev, I. Ibragimov, and S. Muminov, Annals Phys. 487, 170360 (2026) , arXiv:2509.24633 [gr-qc]

    2026

  112. [121]

    Dubinsky, Annals Phys

    A. Dubinsky, Annals Phys. 485, 170299 (2026) , arXiv:2509.11017 [gr-qc]

    2026

  113. [122]

    R. A. Konoplya, Z. Stuchlík, and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 99, 024007 (2019) , arXiv:1810.01295 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  114. [123]

    Malik, Z

    Z. Malik, Z. Naturforsch. A 79, 1063 (2024)

    2024

  115. [124]

    Dubinsky, Mod

    A. Dubinsky, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 39, 2450108 (2024) , arXiv:2404.18004 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  116. [125]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, J. Rayimbaev, B. Rahmatov, F. Shayi- mov, and I. Davletov, Phys. Lett. B 876, 140392 (2026), arXiv:2601.17906 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  117. [126]

    R. A. Konoplya and C. Molina, Phys. Rev. D 71, 124009 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0504139

    2005 arXiv

  118. [127]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Lett. B 853, 138685 (2024) , arXiv:2307.01110 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  119. [128]

    Dubinsky, Eur

    A. Dubinsky, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 924 (2025) , arXiv:2505.08545 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  120. [129]

    R. H. Price, Phys. Rev. D 5, 2419 (1972)

    1972

  121. [130]

    E. W. Leaver, Phys. Rev. D 34, 384 (1986)

    1986

  122. [131]

    Nollert and B

    H.-P. Nollert and B. G. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. D 45, 2617 (1992)

    1992

  123. [132]

    O. J. C. Dias, M. Godazgar, J. E. Santos, G. Carullo, W. Del Pozzo, and D. Laghi, Phys. Rev. D 105, 084044 (2022), arXiv:2109.13949 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  124. [133]

    Onozawa, Phys

    H. Onozawa, Phys. Rev. D 55, 3593 (1997) , arXiv:gr- qc/9610048

    1997

  125. [134]

    S. V. Bolokhov, Phys. Rev. D 110, 024010 (2024) , arXiv:2311.05503 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  126. [135]

    S. V. Bolokhov, Phys. Lett. B 856, 138879 (2024) , arXiv:2310.12326 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  127. [136]

    A. F. Zinhailo, Fortsch. Phys. 73, e70038 (2025)

    2025

  128. [137]

    Kanti, R

    P. Kanti, R. A. Konoplya, and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 74, 064008 (2006) , arXiv:gr-qc/0607048

    2006 arXiv

  129. [138]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, JHEP 06, 037 (2004) , arXiv:hep-th/0402080

    2004 arXiv

  130. [139]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, A. Shermatov, J. Rayimbaev, M. Maty- oqubov, and O. Sirajiddin, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 1484 (2025), arXiv:2511.22366 [gr-qc]

    2025

  131. [140]

    Han and B

    H. Han and B. Gwak, Phys. Rev. D 113, 064058 (2026) , arXiv:2508.12989 [gr-qc]

    2026

  132. [141]

    Dubinsky, Mod

    A. Dubinsky, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 40, 2550111 (2025) , arXiv:2412.00625 [gr-qc] . 15

    2025

  133. [142]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, JCAP 09, 068 (2024) , arXiv:2406.11694 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  134. [143]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Lett. B 861, 139288 (2025) , arXiv:2408.11162 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  135. [144]

    Han and B

    H. Han and B. Gwak, PTEP 2026, 043E01 (2026) , arXiv:2601.18613 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  136. [145]

    Malik, JCAP 04, 042 (2025) , arXiv:2412.19443 [gr- qc]

    Z. Malik, JCAP 04, 042 (2025) , arXiv:2412.19443 [gr- qc]

    2025 arXiv

  137. [146]

    Skvortsova, Eur

    M. Skvortsova, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 854 (2025) , arXiv:2411.06007 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  138. [147]

    S. V. Bolokhov and M. Skvortsova, JCAP 04, 025 (2025), arXiv:2412.11166 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  139. [148]

    Ohashi and M.-a

    A. Ohashi and M.-a. Sakagami, Class. Quant. Grav. 21, 3973 (2004) , arXiv:gr-qc/0407009

    2004 arXiv

  140. [149]

    Koyama and A

    H. Koyama and A. Tomimatsu, Phys. Rev. D 65, 084031 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0112075

    2002 arXiv

  141. [150]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 76, 084018 (2007) , [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 90, 029901 (2014)], arXiv:0707.1890 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  142. [151]

    Moderski and M

    R. Moderski and M. Rogatko, Phys. Rev. D 64, 044024 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0105056

    2001 arXiv

  143. [152]

    Rogatko and A

    M. Rogatko and A. Szyplowska, Phys. Rev. D 76, 044010 (2007)

    2007

  144. [153]

    R. A. Konoplya and A. Zhidenko, Phys. Rev. D 97, 084034 (2018) , arXiv:1712.06667 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  145. [154]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, (2026), arXiv:2603.24424 [gr-qc]

    2026

  146. [155]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 515 (2026) , arXiv:2603.10844 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  147. [156]

    Skvortsova, (2026), arXiv:2606.15785 [gr-qc]

    M. Skvortsova, (2026), arXiv:2606.15785 [gr-qc]

    2026

  148. [157]

    Dubinsky, (2026), arXiv:2607.07955 [gr-qc]

    A. Dubinsky, (2026), arXiv:2607.07955 [gr-qc]

    2026 arXiv

  149. [158]

    B. C. Lütfüoğlu, R. Javlon, M. Abdullaev, P. Satimbay, and S. Zoirov, (2026), 10.13140/RG.2.2.33969.54881

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.