Higher-dimensional black hole solutions with scalar hair and dilaton field and toroidal horizons and interior solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we investigate black hole solutions with toroidal horizons in scalar hair and dilaton gravity. First, we obtain the field equations in n-dimensions. Then, we propose different models (ansatz) and find the exact solutions for these types of ansatzs. These solutions are not asymptotically (anti) de Sitter or flat, except in one special case. We also show that the BTZand BTZ-like solutions emerge from some of these solutions as a special case. We also show that when the event horizon radius increases, the temperature will be the same in various dimensions. The only difference is noticeable near the origin (this statement is clear from the figures). For these solutions, we obtained a new version of the Smarr formula. In addition, we show that the presence of the scalar field makes the black holes more stable near the origin, except for the BTZ case. In general, the presence of a scalar field is an important factor in black hole stability investigations. In the critical behavior analysis, we find that there is no evidence to show the existence of P-V criticality. Here, we present a class of interior solutions corresponding to the solution in a scalar hair gravity exterior. The solution obtained in the linear case was regular and well-behaved at the stellar interior.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".