Phenomenological aspects of black holes beyond general relativity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While singularities are inevitable in the classical theory of general relativity, it is commonly believed that they will not be present when quantum gravity effects are taken into account in a consistent framework. In particular, the structure of black holes should be modified in frameworks beyond general relativity that aim at regularizing singularities. Being agnostic on the nature of such theory, in this paper we classify the possible alternatives to classical black holes and provide a minimal set of phenomenological parameters that describe their characteristic features. The introduction of these parameters allows us to study, in a largely model-independent manner and taking into account all the relevant physics, the phenomenology associated with these quantum-modified black holes. We perform an extensive analysis of different observational channels and obtain the most accurate characterization of the viable constraints that can be placed using current data. Aside from facilitating a critical revision of previous work, this analysis also allows us to highlight how different channels are capable of probing certain features but are oblivious to others, and pinpoint the theoretical aspects that should be addressed in order to strengthen these tests.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".