Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this chapter we review the state-of-the-art of black holes in asymptotically safe gravity. After a brief recap of the asymptotic safety program, we shall summarize the features of asymptotic-safety-inspired black-hole models that have been constructed in the past by the so-called renormalization group improvement. Specifically, we will discuss static configurations, both in spherically- and axially-symmetric settings, the role played by the cosmological constant, and the impact of the collapse dynamics in determining black-hole configurations realized in Nature. In particular, we will review how quantum gravity could modify the Buchdahl limit and the corresponding conditions to form ultra-compact objects and Planckian black holes. We will then proceed by describing the most recent developments, particularly those aiming at making model building in asymptotic safety more rigorous and free from ambiguities. These include self-consistent and coordinate-independent versions of the renormalization group improvement, and next steps to fill the gap between model building and renormalization group computations in asymptotic safety. Finally, we will focus on a selection of results that have been obtained from first-principle calculations or arguments, within and beyond asymptotic safety. Concretely, we will review the state-of-the-art in determining black-hole entropy in asymptotic safety from a microstate counting, and progress in deriving the quantum-corrected Newtonian potential. We will discuss how in quantum gravity theories linked to a gravitational path integral singularity resolution could be achieved by a dynamical suppression of singular configurations. Finally, we will show that -- independent of the specific ultraviolet completion of gravity -- asymptotic modifications to Schwarzschild black holes are strongly constrained by the principle of least action at large distance scales.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".