Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Topology and response singularity split in black hole branches

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 · glm-5.2

2026-07-09 13:03 UTC pith:L62PTLKT

load-bearing objection Solid diagnostic paper: correctly shows why topological number change and response singularity occur at different temperatures in charged AdS black holes. Math is transparent, scope is narrow but honestly stated. the 1 major comments →

arxiv 2607.07364 v1 pith:L62PTLKT submitted 2026-07-08 hep-th gr-qc

Topological changes and response singularities in black hole thermodynamic branch structure

Di Wu This is my paper
classification hep-th gr-qc PACS 04.70.Dy04.60.Cf
keywords branchtopologicalpointthermodynamicblackchangesdiagnosticsdifferent
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 addresses a diagnostic puzzle in black hole thermodynamics: when a topological phase transition (a change in the total winding number W) occurs, it does not coincide with the temperature at which a thermodynamic response function diverges. The author examines three charged AdS black hole examples — four-dimensional EMDA, four-dimensional Horowitz-Sen, and five-dimensional Kaluza-Klein — where the inverse temperature τ_a at which W changes is separated from the inverse temperature τ_b at which the fixed-charge-parameter branch response C_par becomes singular. By reanalyzing the zero point curve τ(r_h) that underlies both diagnostics, the paper shows that the two events probe different local structures of the same branch geometry. At τ_a, a branch carrying winding number −1 enters the physical domain (r_h > 0) through the boundary r_h = 0, changing the total topological number W from +1 to 0. The corresponding positive-radius point r_a is regular: τ'(r_a) ≠ 0, so C_par remains finite. At τ_b, the zero point curve has a turning point at finite radius where τ'(r_b) = 0, causing C_par to diverge. At this same point, a pair of branches with opposite windings (−1 and +1) annihilates, which changes the branch count but preserves W because the net winding change is zero. The central claim is that the topological phase transition and the response singularity are distinct local events of the same zero point branch geometry, with different geometric origins: one is a boundary membership and index-flow event, the other is a finite-radius differential degeneracy.

Core claim

The paper identifies a local mechanism that separates two diagnostics of black hole thermodynamic branch structure. The total topological number W changes at τ_a because a winding-carrying branch enters or leaves the physical domain through the boundary r_h = 0 — a membership and index-flow event. The response function C_par diverges at τ_b because the zero point curve τ(r_h) has a turning point at finite radius where τ'(r_b) = 0 — a differential degeneracy. At τ_b, the annihilating branch pair carries opposite windings, so the branch count changes but W is preserved. The two diagnostics therefore measure different local features of the same branch geometry rather than being redundant labels

What carries the argument

The zero point curve τ(r_h), obtained by solving the thermodynamic vector field condition ϕ_{r_h} = 0 for the auxiliary inverse temperature τ as a function of horizon radius r_h. Two local features of this curve carry the argument: (1) the physical branch set B_phys(τ), which counts zero points with positive radius and their winding numbers w_i = −sgn τ'(r_i) (valid when S'(r_h) > 0), determining W; and (2) the derivative τ'(r_h), whose vanishing at a finite-radius turning point r_b produces the divergence of C_par = −τ S'(r_h) / τ'(r_h). The boundary r_h = 0 is not counted as a physical branch; only positive-radius roots contribute to W.

Load-bearing premise

The mechanism is established by analyzing only three specific black hole families with particular representative parameter choices. The paper explicitly states the analysis is deliberately restricted to these cases, and the key conditions (S'(r_h) > 0 for r_h > 0, and the absence of simultaneous compensating events) are verified only for these examples, not proven in general.

What would settle it

A black hole family exhibiting a temperature-dependent change of W where τ_a and τ_b coincide — i.e., where the W-changing event is also a finite-radius turning point of τ(r_h) — would show that the separation is not a universal feature. Alternatively, a case where S'(r_h) changes sign or where simultaneous compensating events occur at the boundary would break the winding assignment w = −sgn τ'(r_h) and could invalidate the branch accounting.

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

If this is right

  • If the separation mechanism is general, thermodynamic topological phase transitions in other black hole families (rotating, higher-curvature, etc.) should be checked for whether the W-changing temperature coincides with or separates from response singularities — the paper's mechanism predicts they need not coincide.
  • The opposite-winding pair annihilation at τ_b that preserves W suggests that branch count and topological number carry genuinely different information about black hole phase structure, which could matter for holographic interpretations where topology is used to classify dual CFT phase transitions.
  • The distinction between boundary membership events (at r_h = 0) and interior turning-point events (at finite r_h) could be relevant to understanding extremal limits and small-black-hole physics, where the r_h → 0 boundary plays a special role.
  • The result implies that using W alone as a phase-transition diagnostic may miss thermodynamically singular points (like τ_b), and conversely that response-function divergences need not correspond to topological changes — both diagnostics are needed for a complete picture.

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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript addresses a diagnostic puzzle in black hole thermodynamic topology: in three charged AdS black hole examples (4D EMDA, 4D Horowitz-Sen, 5D Kaluza-Klein), the inverse temperature τ_a at which the total topological number W changes is separated from the inverse temperature τ_b at which a fixed-charge-parameter branch response C_par diverges. The author shows that the change of W at τ_a is a boundary membership and index flow event (a zero point enters through r_h = 0), while the singularity at τ_b arises from a finite-radius turning point (τ'(r_b) = 0) where an opposite-winding pair annihilates, preserving W. The key formula C_par = -τ S'(r_h)/τ'(r_h) (Eq. 42) directly shows why C_par diverges at turning points and remains finite at regular points. The branch accounting in Table I and Eq. (34) tracks winding numbers correctly. The analysis is restricted to three representative parameter choices, as explicitly acknowledged in Sec. VI.

Significance. The paper provides a clean, internally consistent local mechanism for why two diagnostics of black hole branch structure — the topological number W and the branch response C_par — can identify different inverse temperatures. The derivation of C_par = -τ S'(r_h)/τ'(r_h) (Eq. 42) is parameter-free and directly connects the response singularity to the turning point condition τ'(r_b) = 0. The winding sign formula w_i = -sgn(τ'(r_i)) (Eq. 26), the local normal form near r_b (Eq. 31, A < 0), and the boundary analysis near r_h = 0 (Eqs. 44–45) are all verified explicitly for the three examples. The falsifiable prediction that τ_a and τ_b are generically separated when the zero point curve has a single positive-radius turning point and a boundary intersection is a concrete, testable claim. The paper does not overclaim generality: Sec. VI states the analysis is deliberately restricted to three examples.

major comments (1)
  1. §III, Eq. (22) and surrounding text: The branch accounting formula ΔW = Σ_entering w_i − Σ_leaving w_i assumes 'no simultaneous compensating event occurs' and 'no zero point enters or leaves the positive radius domain through an outer endpoint.' These assumptions are verified only for the three specific representative parameter choices (Eqs. 27–29). The paper acknowledges this restriction in Sec. VI, but the central claim that τ_a and τ_b have 'distinct local origins' is presented as a general mechanism. A brief remark clarifying whether the mechanism is expected to hold generically for charged AdS black holes with similar zero point curve topology (single positive turning point, τ → 0 as r_h → ∞, boundary entry at r_h = 0), or whether it is strictly limited to the three analyzed families, would strengthen the reader's ability to assess the scope. This is a scope-clarity issue rather a a
minor comments (5)
  1. Table II caption: The statement 'In all three examples, τ'(r_a) ≠ 0 and A < 0' is supported by the numerical values listed, but the caption could note that these are numerical verifications rather than analytical proofs, for clarity.
  2. §IV, Eq. (42): The notation C_par is introduced as C_{q_i, P, r_0} in Eq. (40) but written as C_par throughout the subsequent text. A single consistent notation would improve readability.
  3. Figure 1: The three panels are labeled (a), (b), (c) but the caption does not explicitly state which panel corresponds to which example in the same order as listed in the text. While inferable, explicit labeling would help.
  4. §II.B, Eq. (9): The critical charge q_c = sqrt(3/(8πP)) is written without the square root symbol in the text ('qc = r 3 8πP'), though the intended meaning is clear from context.
  5. The abstract and introduction reference 'Ref. [JHEP 06 (2024) 213]' and 'Ref. [45]' interchangeably; standardizing to a single reference format would be cleaner.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful reading and for the constructive scope-clarity suggestion. The referee's single major comment is well-taken: the manuscript verifies the mechanism for three representative parameter choices and explicitly acknowledges this restriction in Sec. VI, but it does not state whether the mechanism is expected to extend to other charged AdS black holes with the same qualitative zero point curve topology. We agree that a brief remark on expected generality would strengthen the paper and will add one.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §III, Eq. (22) and surrounding text: The branch accounting formula ΔW = Σ_entering w_i − Σ_leaving w_i assumes 'no simultaneous compensating event occurs' and 'no zero point enters or leaves the positive radius domain through an outer endpoint.' These assumptions are verified only for the three specific representative parameter choices (Eqs. 27–29). The paper acknowledges this restriction in Sec. VI, but the central claim that τ_a and τ_b have 'distinct local origins' is presented as a general mechanism. A brief remark clarifying whether the mechanism is expected to hold generically for charged AdS black holes with similar zero point curve topology (single positive turning point, τ → 0 as r_h → ∞, boundary entry at r_h = 0), or whether it is strictly limited to the three analyzed families, would strengthen the reader's ability to assess the scope.

    Authors: We agree with this comment. The manuscript currently verifies the assumptions underlying Eq. (22) — namely, no simultaneous compensating event and no outer-endpoint entry/exit — only for the three representative parameter choices in Eqs. (27)–(29). Sec. VI states that the analysis is 'deliberately restricted to the three temperature dependent topological phase transition examples,' but it does not address whether the mechanism is expected to extend beyond these specific families. This is a genuine gap in scope clarification, and we will address it in the revised manuscript. Specifically, we will add a remark in Sec. VI (or at the end of Sec. V) stating the following: The mechanism — that W changes at a boundary membership event (τ_a) while C_par diverges at a separate finite-radius turning point (τ_b) — is expected to hold for any charged AdS black hole whose zero point curve τ(r_h) satisfies the following qualitative conditions: (i) a single positive-radius turning point where τ'(r_b) = 0 with A = τ''(r_b)/2 < 0, (ii) τ → 0 as r_h → ∞, and (iii) a boundary intersection at r_h = 0 through which a single branch with nonzero winding enters or leaves the positive-radius domain. Under these conditions, the local arguments of Secs. III–V apply without modification: the winding sign formula w_i = -sgn(τ'(r_i)) (Eq. 26), the local normal form near r_b (Eq. 31), the boundary analysis near r_h = 0 (Eqs. 44–45), and the parameter-free response formula C_par = -τ S'(r_h)/τ'(r_h) (Eq. 42) are all local statements that do not depend on the specific functional form of τ(r_h). However, we will also be explicit that this is an expectation based on the structural conditions, not a proven classification theorem: we have not verified that all charged AdS black hole families with W = 0/1 → revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity. The central mechanism is derived from explicit zero-point curves and standard thermodynamic identities, not from the self-cited prior work.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that τ_a (topological change) and τ_b (response singularity) have distinct local origins—is derived from ingredients that are independently computed within the paper. The zero-point curves τ(r_h) in Eqs. (27)–(29) are obtained by solving ϕ_{r_h}=0 for the generalized free energy F = M − S/τ (Eq. 1), using the standard thermodynamic quantities from Eqs. (7) and (16), which trace to Ref. [9] (Cvetic–Gibbons–Kubiznak–Pope, not self-cited). The winding formula w_i = −sgn(τ'(r_i)) (Eq. 26) is derived from the Jacobian of the vector field (Eqs. 23–25) and requires S'(r_h) > 0, which is verified directly from the explicit entropy formulas. The branch response C_par = −τ S'(r_h)/τ'(r_h) (Eq. 42) follows from standard thermodynamic identities (Eq. 41). The conclusions—that C_par diverges at τ_b because τ'(r_b)=0 (Eq. 46–48) and remains finite at τ_a because τ'(r_a)≠0 (Table II)—follow from direct differentiation of the explicit rational/algebraic curves. The self-citation to Ref. [45] (shared authorship) provides the problem setting: which black hole families, which parameter regimes exhibit temperature-dependent W changes, and the existence of τ_a and τ_b. It does not provide the mechanism or the separation result. The paper explicitly acknowledges this division in Sec. VI: 'The analysis separates the facts taken from Ref. [45] from the additional local interpretation given here.' The self-citation is therefore not load-bearing for the central claim. Score 1 reflects the minor self-citation that sets up the problem but does not constitute circularity in the derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities, particles, forces, or dimensions. It works entirely within the established framework of thermodynamic topology applied to known black hole solutions. The free parameters are representative numerical choices for known physical quantities (pressure, charges), not fitted constants. The axioms are domain-specific assumptions verified for the representative cases, not ad hoc postulates.

free parameters (5)
  • P r_0^2 = 0.1
    Representative pressure value chosen for numerical analysis in all three examples (Eqs. 10, 13, 19). Not fitted to data; chosen to place the system in the phase transition regime.
  • q/r_0 (4D EMDA) = 0.2
    Representative charge value chosen below the critical charge q_c (Eq. 10). Not fitted; chosen as a representative point in the phase transition regime.
  • q_1/r_0 (4D HS) = 0.1
    Representative smaller charge parameter value chosen below q_1c (Eq. 13). Not fitted; chosen as a representative point.
  • q_2/r_0 (4D HS) = 1
    Representative larger charge parameter value (Eq. 13). Not fitted; chosen as a representative point.
  • q/r_0^2 (5D K-K) = 1
    Representative charge value chosen below the critical charge q_c (Eq. 19). Not fitted; chosen as a representative point.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption S'(r_h) > 0 for r_h > 0 in the representative parameter regimes
    Used in Eq. (26) to determine winding signs and in Eq. (42) to ensure the numerator of C_par is regular. Stated in Sec. IV: 'The entropies listed in the previous section have S'(r_h) > 0 for r_h > 0 in the representative parameter regimes used below.'
  • domain assumption No simultaneous compensating event occurs during the local branch events
    Used in the index flow bookkeeping (Eq. 22). Stated in Sec. III: 'This local bookkeeping assumes that the winding assignments are identified, that no simultaneous compensating event occurs...'
  • domain assumption The zero point curve τ(r_h) has exactly one positive turning point r_b in the analyzed examples
    Used to establish the branch structure in Table I. Verified numerically for the representative parameters: 'direct differentiation of the three rational/algebraic curves gives a single positive zero of τ'(r_h)' (Sec. III).
  • standard math Standard thermodynamic topological construction (vector field, winding numbers) applies to these black hole systems
    The construction in Sec. II.A follows Refs. [18, 19] and is standard within the subfield.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 16762 in / 2735 out tokens · 430308 ms · 2026-07-09T13:03:13.776489+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Different diagnostics of black hole thermodynamic branch structure do not always identify the same local event. We examine this issue in charged AdS black hole examples where a thermodynamic topological phase transition is known to occur. In these examples, previously reported in [JHEP 06 (2024) 213}], the inverse temperature $\tau_a$ at which the total topological number changes is separated from the inverse temperature $\tau_b$ at which the fixed charge parameter branch response considered here becomes singular. Reanalyzing the same zero point branch geometry, we find that the two diagnostics track different local structures. The change at $\tau_a$ is a boundary membership and index flow event of the positive radius physical branch set: a zero point with nonzero winding enters or leaves the counted domain. The singularity at $\tau_b$ is instead caused by a turning point at finite radius, where a pair of branches annihilates. Since the two branches carry opposite windings, this event changes the branch count but preserves the total topological number. Thus, in the analyzed examples, the thermodynamic topological phase transition and the branch response singularity are distinct diagnostics of the same zero point branch geometry, with different local origins.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.07364 by Di Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Zero point curves [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_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. Resolved Maxwell-Boundary Normal Forms and Exact Reentrant Scaling in Accelerating AdS Black Holes

    hep-th 2026-07 accept novelty 8.0

    The charged accelerating AdS black hole has an exact reentrant-turning locus for all 0<µ<0.2026, with the pressure and temperature windows vanishing as µ⁴ and µ³ and a universal blow-up profile bT = 2√bP − bP.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    physical

    In the branch counting analysis of this paper,r 0 is not an outer end- point of the physical domain; the counted radial domain is the open regionr h >0. The associated vector field is ϕ= ∂F ∂rh ,−cot Θ csc Θ .(2) Its zero points lie at Θ =π/2 and at the roots ofϕ rh = 0. Solvingϕ rh = 0 forτgives the zero point curve τ=τ(r h).(3) Each isolated zero point ...

    work page 2091

  2. [2]

    J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, and S. W. Hawking, The four laws of black hole mechanics, Commun. Math. Phys.31, 161 (1973)

    work page 1973

  3. [3]

    J. D. Bekenstein, Black holes and entropy, Phys. Rev. D7, 2333 (1973)

    work page 1973

  4. [4]

    S. W. Hawking, Particle creation by black holes, Com- mun. Math. Phys.43, 199 (1975)

    work page 1975

  5. [5]

    G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, Action integrals and partition functions in quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D15, 2752 (1977)

    work page 1977

  6. [6]

    S. W. Hawking and D. N. Page, Thermodynamics of black holes in anti-de Sitter space, Commun. Math. Phys.87, 577 (1983)

    work page 1983

  7. [7]

    Chamblin, R

    A. Chamblin, R. Emparan, C. V. Johnson, and R. C. Myers, Charged AdS black holes and catastrophic holog- raphy, Phys. Rev. D60, 064018 (1999)

    work page 1999

  8. [8]

    Chamblin, R

    A. Chamblin, R. Emparan, C. V. Johnson, and R. C. Myers, Holography, thermodynamics and fluctuations of charged AdS black holes, Phys. Rev. D60, 104026 (1999)

    work page 1999

  9. [9]

    Kastor, S

    D. Kastor, S. Ray, and J. Traschen, Enthalpy and the mechanics of AdS black holes, Classical Quantum Grav- ity26, 195011 (2009)

    work page 2009

  10. [10]

    Cvetic, G

    M. Cvetic, G. W. Gibbons, D. Kubiznak, and C. N. Pope, Black hole enthalpy and an entropy inequality for the thermodynamic volume, Phys. Rev. D84, 024037 (2011)

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    Kubiznak and R

    D. Kubiznak and R. B. Mann,P-Vcriticality of charged AdS black holes, J. High Energy Phys.07(2012) 033

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    Kubiznak, R

    D. Kubiznak, R. B. Mann, and M. Teo, Black hole chem- 9 istry: Thermodynamics with Lambda, Classical Quan- tum Gravity34, 063001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  13. [13]

    Altamirano, D

    N. Altamirano, D. Kubiznak, and R. B. Mann, Reentrant phase transitions in rotating anti-de Sitter black holes, Phys. Rev. D88, 101502(R) (2013)

    work page 2013

  14. [14]

    R. A. Hennigar, R. B. Mann, and E. Tjoa, Superfluid black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 021301 (2017)

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    W. Cong, D. Kubiznak, and R. B. Mann, Thermodynam- ics of AdS black holes: Critical behavior of the central charge, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 091301 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    M. R. Visser, Holographic thermodynamics requires a chemical potential for color, Phys. Rev. D105, 106014 (2022)

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    W. Cong, D. Kubiznak, R. B. Mann, and M. R. Visser, Holographic CFT phase transitions and criticality for charged AdS black holes, J. High Energy Phys.08(2022) 174

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    M. B. Ahmed, W. Cong, D. Kubiznak, R. B. Mann, and M. R. Visser, Holographic dual of extended black hole thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 181401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Wei and Y.-X

    S.-W. Wei and Y.-X. Liu, Topology of black hole ther- modynamics, Phys. Rev. D105, 104003 (2022)

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Wei, Y.-X

    S.-W. Wei, Y.-X. Liu, and R. B. Mann, Black hole solu- tions as topological thermodynamic defects, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 191101 (2022)

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    M. B. Ahmed, D. Kubiznak, and R. B. Mann, Vortex/anti-vortex pair creation in black hole thermo- dynamics, Phys. Rev. D107, 046013 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    P. K. Yerra and C. Bhamidipati, Topology of black hole thermodynamics in Gauss-Bonnet gravity, Phys. Rev. D105, 104053 (2022)

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    P. K. Yerra and C. Bhamidipati, Topology of Born-Infeld AdS black holes in four-dimensional novel Einstein- Gauss-Bonnet gravity, Phys. Lett. B835, 137591 (2022)

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    P. K. Yerra, C. Bhamidipati, and S. Mukherji, Topol- ogy of critical points and Hawking-Page transition, Phys. Rev. D106, 064059 (2022)

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Fan, Topological interpretation for phase transi- tions of black holes, Phys

    Z.-Y. Fan, Topological interpretation for phase transi- tions of black holes, Phys. Rev. D107, 044026 (2023)

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    C. H. Liu and J. Wang, The topological natures of the Gauss-Bonnet black hole in AdS space, Phys. Rev. D107, 064023 (2023)

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    C. X. Fang, J. Jiang, and M. Zhang, Revisiting ther- modynamic topologies of black holes, J. High Energy Phys.01(2023) 102

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    N. J. Gogoi and P. Phukon, Topology of thermodynam- ics inR-charged black holes, Phys. Rev. D107, 106009 (2023)

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    Zhang and J

    M. Zhang and J. Jiang, Bulk-boundary thermodynamic equivalence: A topology viewpoint, J. High Energy Phys.06(2023) 115

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Wu, Topological classes of rotating black holes, Phys

    D. Wu, Topological classes of rotating black holes, Phys. Rev. D107, 024024 (2023)

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Wu and S.-Q

    D. Wu and S.-Q. Wu, Topological classes of thermody- namics of rotating AdS black holes, Phys. Rev. D107, 084002 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Wu, Classifying topology of consistent thermody- namics of the four-dimensional neutral Lorentzian NUT- charged spacetimes, Eur

    D. Wu, Classifying topology of consistent thermody- namics of the four-dimensional neutral Lorentzian NUT- charged spacetimes, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 365 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Wu, Consistent thermodynamics and topological classes for the four-dimensional Lorentzian charged Taub-NUT spacetimes, Eur

    D. Wu, Consistent thermodynamics and topological classes for the four-dimensional Lorentzian charged Taub-NUT spacetimes, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 589 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Wu, Topological classes of thermodynamics of the four-dimensional static accelerating black holes, Phys

    D. Wu, Topological classes of thermodynamics of the four-dimensional static accelerating black holes, Phys. Rev. D108, 084041 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    X.-D. Zhu, D. Wu, and D. Wen, Topological classes of thermodynamics of the rotating charged AdS black holes in gauged supergravities, Phys. Lett. B856, 138919 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    H. Chen, D. Wu, M.-Y. Zhang, H. Hassanabadi, and Z.- W. Long,Thermodynamic topology of phantom AdS black holes in massive gravity, Phys. Dark Univ.46, 101617 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    W. Liu, L. Zhang, D. Wu, and J. Wang, Thermodynamic topological classes of the rotating, accelerating black holes, Classical Quantum Gravity42, 125007 (2025)

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    X.-D. Zhu, W. Liu, and D. Wu, Universal thermody- namic topological classes of rotating black holes, Phys. Lett. B860, 139163 (2025)

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Chen, X.-D

    Y. Chen, X.-D. Zhu, and D. Wu, Universal thermody- namic topological classes of three-dimensional BTZ black holes, Phys. Lett. B865, 139482 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    H. Chen, D. Wu, M.-Y. Zhang, S. Zare, H. Hassanabadi, B.C. L¨ utf¨ uoˇ glu, and Z.-W. Long, Universal thermody- namic topological classes of static black holes in Confor- mal Killing Gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 828 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    M. Tian, Y. Chen, and D. Wu, Dimensional structure of thermodynamic topology in ultraspinning Kerr-AdS black holes, arXiv:2602.05231

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  42. [42]

    Wei, Y.-X

    S.-W. Wei, Y.-X. Liu, and R. B. Mann, Universal topological classifications of black hole thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. D110, L081501 (2024)

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    D. Wu, W. Liu, S.-Q. Wu, and R. B. Mann, Novel topo- logical classes in black hole thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. D111, L061501 (2025)

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    Ai and D

    W. Ai and D. Wu, fW1+ subclass: Extending the topo- logical classification of black hole thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. D112, 124024 (2025)

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    Wu and S.-Q

    D. Wu and S.-Q. Wu, Thermodynamics and topologi- cal classifications of static non-extremal four-charge AdS black hole in the five-dimensionalN= 2,ST U−W 2U gauged supergravity, Eur. Phys. J. C86, 187 (2026)

    work page 2026

  46. [46]

    Wu, S.-Y

    D. Wu, S.-Y. Gu, X.-D. Zhu, Q.-Q. Jiang, and S.-Z. Yang, Topological classes of thermodynamics of the static multi-charge AdS black holes in gauged supergravities: novel temperature-dependent thermodynamic topologi- cal phase transition, J. High Energy Phys.06(2024) 213

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    Duff and J.T

    M.J. Duff and J.T. Liu, Anti-de Sitter black holes in gauged N = 8 supergravity, Nucl. Phys. B554, 237 (1999)

    work page 1999

  48. [48]

    Sen, Rotating Charged Black Hole Solution in Het- erotic String Theory, Phys

    A. Sen, Rotating Charged Black Hole Solution in Het- erotic String Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 1006 (1992)

    work page 1992

  49. [49]

    Horowitz and A

    G.T. Horowitz and A. Sen, Rotating black holes which saturate a Bogomolny bound, Phys. Rev. D53, 808 (1996)

    work page 1996

  50. [50]

    Cvetiˇ c and D

    M. Cvetiˇ c and D. Youm, Near BPS saturated rotating electrically charged black holes as string states, Nucl. Phys. B477, 449 (1996)

    work page 1996

  51. [51]

    Behrndt, M

    K. Behrndt, M. Cvetiˇ c, and W.A. Sabra, Non-extreme black holes of five-dimensional N = 2 AdS supergravity, Nucl. Phys. B553, 317 (1999)

    work page 1999