Slowly rotating black holes in 4D Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the recent derivation of a well-defined $D\ensuremath{\rightarrow}4$ limit for regularized 4D Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet (4DEGB) gravity, there has been considerable interest in testing it as an alternative to Einstein's general theory of relativity. In this paper we construct slowly rotating black hole solutions for 4DEGB gravity in asymptotically flat, de Sitter, and anti--de Sitter spacetimes. At leading order in the rotation parameter, exact solutions of the metric functions are derived and studied for all three of these cases. We compare how physical properties (innermost stable circular orbits, photon rings, black hole shadow, etc.) of the solutions are modified by varying coupling strength of the 4DEGB theory relative to standard Einstein gravity results. We find that a vanishing or negative cosmological constant in 4DEGB gravity enforces a minimum mass on the black hole solutions, whereas a positive cosmological constant enforces both a minimum and maximum mass with a horizon root structure directly analogous to the Reissner-Nordstr\"om--de Sitter spacetime. Besides this, many of the physical properties are qualitatively similar to general relativity, with the greatest deviations typically being found in the low (near-minimal) mass regime.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".