Phase Transition and Critical Phenomena of Charged Einstein-Maxwell-Scalar Black Holes

Hongsheng Zhang; Kun Meng; Zeming Zhuang

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Phase Transition and Critical Phenomena of Charged Einstein-Maxwell-Scalar Black Holes

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that four static charged Einstein-Maxwell-scalar black-hole families undergo a van der Waals-type first-order phase transition with critical exponents (α, β, γ, δ) = (0, 1/2, 1, 3), and that raising the scalar charge q…

desk verdict Competent extended-phase-space analysis of four EMs black hole families; the vdW behavior is real, but the headline claim of a scalar-charge threshold rests on numerical non-detection rather than proof. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.22033 v1 pith:XY7S6XMV submitted 2025-05-28 gr-qc

Zeming Zhuang , Kun Meng , Hongsheng Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification gr-qc PACS 04.70.-s05.70.-a

keywords vanderWaals-typephasetransitionAdSspacetimeEMsblackholecriticalexponentsscalarchargethresholdextendedspacethermodynamicsmeanfieldtheory

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Einstein-Maxwell-scalar (EMs) theory couples a scalar field to the Maxwell field, and this paper asks whether its charged black holes have liquid-gas-like phase transitions in the extended phase space where the cosmological constant acts as pressure. Using four explicit solution families (three in four dimensions, one in five), the authors derive the pressure-volume equation of state from the horizon temperature and show that the P-V curves, Gibbs free energy surfaces, and isobaric heat capacities all carry the signatures of a first-order van der Waals transition. Expanding the pressure near criticality gives the mean-field exponents α=0, β=1/2, γ=1, and δ=3, the same as a van der Waals gas and as RN-AdS black holes. The new qualitative result is that the scalar charge acts as a switch: below a threshold q≈2.0, 2.0, 1.9, 2.2 the transition exists, and above it the transition disappears, while the critical volume and temperature depend non-monotonically on q.

What carries the argument

The central object is the equation of state P(T,r0) assembled from each solution's metric function and temperature, with the specific volume v tied to the horizon radius rather than to the geometric thermodynamic volume; the paper later adopts the uniform identification v=(8/3)πl_P² f_{T1}(r0). The phase transition is diagnosed by the inflection conditions on P(r0), namely ∂P/∂v=0 and ∂²P/∂v²=0, together with the swallowtail in the Gibbs free energy and divergence of the isobaric heat capacity. Near the critical point the pressure is expanded as p=1+c1 t−c2 tφ−c3 φ³ in the reduced variables t=T/Tc−1, φ=v/vc−1, p=P/Pc. Maxwell's equal-area construction forces the coexisting branches to satisfy φ_l=−φ_s, which gives t ∝ φ², and the positivity of c2 and c3 fixes the four mean-field critical exponents and the divergence of C_P.

What would settle it

Solve the exact inflection system (33) for each case using the exact P(T,r0) from Eqs. (35), (42), (48), and (52) at scalar charges just above the claimed thresholds, for example q=2.1 in Case 1 and q=2.3 in Case 4. If a common root P'=P''=0 exists and the swallowtail persists above the threshold, the transition is not actually prohibited; if no root exists just below the threshold, the phase transition would already be absent in a regime where the paper reports it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that each of the four EMs black-hole solutions examined here has a first-order phase transition in the P-V plane of the same kind as a van der Waals fluid, and that the transition's critical exponents are exactly (α, β, γ, δ) = (0, 1/2, 1, 3). The authors compute T(r0) and P(T,r0) from the solution data, impose the inflection conditions, and verify swallowtail behavior of G(T,P) and divergence of C_P. A pressure expansion of the form p=1+c1 t−c2 tφ−c3 φ³ with positive coefficients, combined with Maxwell's equal-area law, gives φ_l=−φ_s and hence t ∝ φ², which fixes the four exponents. They also find that the transition is lost when the scalar charge exceeds approximate thresholds of 2.0 (Cases 1 and 2), 1.9 (Case 3), and 2.2 (Case 4), while in the q→0 limit the solutions reduce to the RN-AdS family and at q=0 to Schwarzschild-AdS. The critical radius and critical temperature each have their own transition points in q where monotonic behavior reverses, which the authors interpret as small scalar charge acting as a perturbation while large scalar charge cannot be treated that way.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that identifying the black hole horizon radius with the fluid's specific volume gives the true phase structure, so that inflection points of P(r0) are the real phase-transition points; if this identification fails beyond the small-scalar-charge regime, the critical points, exponents, and threshold could be artifacts of the choice of volume variable.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the central claim holds, four distinct EMs black-hole families join the same mean-field universality class as van der Waals fluids and RN-AdS black holes, with critical exponents independent of spacetime dimension.
The scalar charge acts as a control parameter: phase transitions persist only below q≈2.0, 2.0, 1.9, 2.2, so EMs theory provides a concrete setting in which scalar hair suppresses thermodynamic criticality.
The critical volume and critical temperature vary non-monotonically with q and have distinct transition points in q, meaning the scalar charge and horizon radius are not interchangeable thermodynamic variables.
As q→0 the black holes reduce to the RN-AdS family, so the known van der Waals behavior of RN-AdS is recovered as the scalar-charge-free limit, while q=0 gives Schwarzschild-AdS.
Positivity of the isobaric heat capacity in all four cases implies thermal stability for the black holes in the regime where the phase transition exists.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The authors report the threshold qt only numerically; an analytic proof that the inflection system (33) has no common root for q>qt would turn the numerical threshold into a theorem.
The volume identification is case-dependent in the early sections and only later unified through f_{T1}(r0); if f_{T1} stops being monotone in r0 outside the studied range, the interpretation of r0 as a fluid volume, and therefore the exponent derivation, would need revisiting.
Because the exponent argument relies mainly on the pressure being linear in temperature and on c2,c3≠0, the same mean-field exponents should carry over to other static charged EMs solutions, including different horizon topologies and higher dimensions, wherever that expansion form holds.
The threshold behavior suggests a testable analog in holographic or condensed-matter models: a sufficiently large scalar charge should suppress the phase transition, which could be probed by computing transport coefficients across the would-be critical point.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a competent application of the standard Kubiznak-Mann extended phase space machinery to four families of charged Einstein-Maxwell-scalar black holes. The van der Waals–type behavior and mean-field exponents are real, but the paper's most advertised result — a scalar-charge threshold above which phase transitions vanish — is supported only by numerical non-detection, not by an actual existence argument.

The derivations are explicit: for each of the four cases the authors compute Q^2 from h(r0)=0, write T and P as functions of (r0,q), locate the critical point numerically, show the swallowtail in G and the divergence in C_P, and then derive the usual exponents α=0, β=1/2, γ=1, δ=3 from a generic Landau expansion. The expansion coefficients are computed for each case. That part is solid and reproducible. The new content is the q-dependence of r0c and Tc for these particular solutions, including the non-monotonic behavior and the claimed threshold. The paper is honest about using the Huang-Fan-Lu solution as input, and the self-citations are not an issue here.

The soft spots are real. First, the threshold. Because P is linear in T, the critical point conditions dP/dr0=0 and d^2P/dr0^2=0 reduce to a single algebraic equation F(r0;q)=0. Saying 'critical point is not found by numerical methods' above q≈2 is not a proof that none exists. The P0/P1 expansion in Section III.C is qualitative; a P1 that diverges to −∞ doesn't exclude an inflection point of the full P. Since the threshold is the headline, this needs either an analytic root analysis or at least an exhaustive numerical scan with checks that candidate roots give physical Q^2>0 and T_c>0.

Second, the specific volume identification. The paper uses different v identifications in different cases (eqs. 37, 44, 54), then in Section III.C asserts a unified v=(8/3)π l_P^2 f_T1 without reconciling the earlier choices. The critical exponents are derived using the unified φ=f_T1(r0)/f_T1(r0c)−1, so the earlier identifications look vestigial, but the paper should say so explicitly and justify monotonicity over the full relevant range.

Third, the q→0 claim in the conclusions conflicts with the paper's own equations. Eq. (30) gives Q^2 ~ q^{D−3} times a finite constant, and eq. (32) shows h→1−2M/r+g^2r^2, which is Schwarzschild-AdS, not RN-AdS. The conclusion says the solution reduces to RN-AdS as q→0; that's wrong. There are also minor cross-reference typos (e.g., 'equations (49) and (50)' in Case 4 should be (50) and (51)).

Overall: the central phase-transition phenomenology holds up for these four families; the threshold result is the weakest link and is currently over-claimed. This deserves a serious referee — the paper is useful and the flaws are addressable. Send it to review, but the referee should insist on the threshold being either proven, or clearly labeled as numerical evidence.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the P–V criticality of static charged Einstein–Maxwell–scalar black holes in the extended phase-space formalism. Using the four solution families of Huang–Fan–Lü (D=4, Δ=1 with k0^2=1,3,5, and D=5, Δ=2), the authors write the equation of state P(r0,T), the Gibbs free energy, and the heat capacities, and report van der Waals-type first-order phase transitions for representative parameters (q=0.05). They give numerical critical points, claim thresholds qt≈2.0,2.0,1.9,2.2 beyond which criticality is absent, and derive critical exponents α=0, β=1/2, γ=1, δ=3 from a pressure expansion. They also study how the critical radius and critical temperature depend on q, identifying several transition points in these q-dependences.

Significance. If substantiated, the paper would add another family of AdS black holes to the universality class of van der Waals/mean-field critical behavior and would identify the scalar charge as a control parameter that can switch off the transition. The paper is transparent in its formalism: thermodynamic quantities are written out explicitly, the critical-exponent derivation is a generic Landau-type expansion rather than a fit to a target result, and the numerical critical points are concrete and reproducible in principle. Its limitations—the unsupported threshold claim and the inconsistent specific-volume identification—are concentrated in Sections III.B and III.C and affect the paper's central novelty. These issues are fixable within the scope of the manuscript, so the appropriate decision is major revision rather than rejection.

major comments (3)

[III.B (threshold claim)] The statement that 'the critical point is not found by numerical methods when the scalar charge exceeds threshold values, which are approximately 2.0 (Case 1), 2.0 (Case 2), 1.9 (Case 3), and 2.2 (Case 4). This conclusively implies the absence of van der Waals-type criticality' is an argument from non-detection, not a proof. Since every equation of state here is linear in T, the conditions ∂P/∂r0=0 and ∂²P/∂r0²=0 eliminate T and reduce to one equation F(r0;q)=0 for each case. The paper does not analyze this equation for q>qt, does not exhaustively scan for roots, and does not check that candidate roots give Q²>0 using (34), (40), (47), or (50) together with Tc>0. The discussion of P0 and P1 in Section III.C and Fig. 4 shows only that the first-order term diverges to negative infinity; it does not exclude an inflection point of the full P. Because the threshold is the principal new result highlighted in the abstract, this missing existence analysis is load-bearing.
[III.B–III.C (specific volume)] The paper uses several distinct identifications of the specific volume: v=(2/3)l0²(4r0-1) in Eq. (37), v=2l_P² r0 in Eqs. (44) and (49), v=(4/3)l_P² r0 in Eq. (54), and finally v=(8/3)π l_P² f_{T1}(r0) in Eq. (56). The last identification is asserted to hold for all four cases, but f_{T1} is defined only in the T=f_{T1}g²+f_{T2} parametrizations of Cases 2–4, Eqs. (41), (48), and (51); Case 1 is not written in that form, so Eq. (56) is undefined for Case 1. The paper also asserts that the phase-transition point and trends are unchanged and that f_{T1} is monotonic 'within the range of r0 utilized', but no proof or explicit range is given. Since the critical expansion in Section IV uses φ=f_{T1}(r0)/f_{T1}(r0c)-1, all quantitative critical parameters and threshold statements depend on this identification. This inconsistency must be resolved.
[IV (exponent range)] The derivation of the exponents in Eq. (63) requires c2≠0 and c3≠0 in the expansion (58), and the coefficients in Eq. (65) are evaluated numerically for q=0.05 only. The paper does not establish that c2 and c3 remain non-zero along the critical branches all the way to qt, where the phase transition is claimed to disappear. If either coefficient vanishes at some q<qt, the standard Landau exponents no longer follow in that region. The claim of dimension independence is also based on only two spacetime dimensions (D=4,5). These extrapolations should either be proven or explicitly flagged as conjectural.

minor comments (5)

[Throughout] Typographical errors should be corrected: 'trems' in Eqs. (35) and (49), 'exapmles' after Eq. (57), 'respresent' in the Fig. 3 caption, and 'Einstei n' in the title.
[Eqs. (36)–(37)] The notation for the Planck length is inconsistent: l0 is used in Eqs. (36)–(37) while l_P is used elsewhere; the physical dimensions of the approximate specific volumes should be checked.
[Eq. (30)] The limit is evaluated as a '0/0 = finite value' without a careful limiting procedure; the q→0 reduction of Q² should be written out explicitly.
[Figs. 5 and 6] The figures show only parts of the q-range for some cases, making the claimed 'volume transition point' and 'temperature transition point' hard to verify; a table of the transition points and full-range plots would help.
[Eq. (25)] The 'proof' of the first law is presented as a chain of formal differentials; it would be clearer to state that the thermodynamic quantities are checked to satisfy the extended first law, rather than deriving it from dM=dM/dQ dQ.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the EMs solution and EoS come from external work, critical values are obtained by solving inflection conditions, and the vdW critical exponents follow from a generic expansion with coefficients computed from the EoS; the threshold claim rests on numerics, not on a circular fit.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. The static charged EMs solution (eqs. 14-23) is imported from Huang-Fan-Lu [40], an external source, and the paper's own self-citations (refs. 17, 18, 20, 34) appear only as background on FRW phase transitions and the physical meaning of P,V; they do not supply any load-bearing premise. The equations of state for the four cases (eqs. 34-35, 40-42, 47-48, 50-52) are computed algebraically from that solution, and the critical points (Pc, r0c, Tc) are obtained by solving the inflection conditions (33) numerically, not by fitting to van der Waals values. The critical-exponent derivation (eqs. 57-63) is a generic Taylor expansion: because P is linear in T and the first two r0-derivatives vanish at the critical point, the pressure reduces to p = 1 + c1 t - c2 t phi - c3 phi^3 + ..., and Maxwell's equal-area construction (60) then yields beta = 1/2, gamma = 1, delta = 3, alpha = 0. The coefficients c1, c2, c3 are evaluated from the actual EoS (eq. 65), so the vdW exponents are a consequence, not an input. The volume identification v proportional to f_T1 in eq. (56) is a monotonic reparametrization and does not change the inflection-point critical data, and no target result is encoded in it. The paper does contain a genuine rigor gap: the claim that phase transitions are 'prohibited' for q > qt rests only on numerical non-detection of critical points plus a qualitative P0/P1 expansion, with no exhaustive root analysis. That is an evidence/proof weakness, not a circular step, and it does not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claims rest on the validity of the EMs solution from ref. [40], on the extended phase space identification of Lambda with pressure, and on an ad hoc identification of the specific volume with a monotonic function of the horizon radius. There are five hand-chosen constants (alpha, gamma1, gamma2, k, and the reference value q=0.05) that are not derived from first principles; the numerical critical points and the threshold values depend on them. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)

alpha = 1
Coupling constant in the Lagrangian (14). Chosen by hand for the numerical analysis; the phase transition and threshold values depend on it.
gamma1 = 4
Chosen to match the RN-AdS limit in eq. (31). A fitted-to-limit choice rather than an independent constant.
gamma2 = 1
Chosen by hand; affects the numerical critical points and threshold.
k = 1
Spherical horizon choice; the paper does not analyze k=0 or k=-1.
q = 0.05
Scalar charge used for the main P-V, G, and C_P plots. Varies across the paper for the threshold analysis.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The EMs black hole solution (21)-(29) from ref. [40] is a valid solution and its thermodynamic quantities (23) obey the first law (25).
The paper reproduces the solution from Huang-Fan-Lu and gives a sketchy derivation of the first law; the validity of the solution is assumed from the prior reference.
domain assumption The cosmological constant Lambda acts as thermodynamic pressure and the mass M as enthalpy in the extended phase space.
Standard extended phase space assumption from refs. [7,8].
ad hoc to paper The specific volume v can be identified with a monotonic function of r0, ultimately f_{T1}(r0) in eq. (56).
The paper uses different v identifications in different cases (eqs. 37, 44, 54) and then unifies them with eq. (56) without a rigorous derivation; the critical exponent derivation depends on this identification.
domain assumption The inflection-point conditions (33) and the Maxwell equal area law (60) govern the phase transition and critical exponents.
Standard approach in black hole thermodynamics, inherited from fluid mechanics and Landau theory.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Phase Transition and Critical Phenomena of Charged Einstein-Maxwell-Scalar Black Holes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XY7S6XMV

@misc{pith2026250522033,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Phase Transition and Critical Phenomena of Charged Einstein-Maxwell-Scalar Black Holes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XY7S6XMV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.22033}
}

read the original abstract

We study the phase transition and critical phenomenon of charged black holes in Einstein-Maxwell-scalar (EMs) theory. Through comprehensive analysis of thermodynamic behaviors manifested in P-V diagrams, G(T,P) surfaces, and C_P curves, we establish that these black holes exhibit van der Waals-type phase transition behavior. The derived critical exponents governing the phase transition show precise correspondence with both van der Waals gas-liquid systems, reinforcing the connection between black hole thermodynamics and mean field theory statistics. The findings reveal a crucial dependence of phase transition properties on the scalar charge parameter. A critical threshold emerges where phase transitions become prohibited when scalar charge exceeds a specific magnitude. However, the transition persists asymptotically as scalar charge approaches zero. The analysis further demonstrates nonlinear relationships between scalar charge and critical parameters: while small scalar charges induce increasing critical volume with charge magnitude, larger values produce an inverse trend. Critical temperature displays complementary behavior, maintaining monotonic variation under certain conditions while exhibiting inverse correlation with critical volume in others. Significantly, the transition points governing critical volume and temperature trends occur at distinct scalar charge values for different black holes, indicating a non-trivial parameter dependence. These results highlight the scalar charge's dual role as both an enabler and suppressor of phase transitions in EMs black holes, providing new insights into the interplay between geometric configurations and thermodynamic properties in modified gravity theories.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.22033 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: Gibbs free energy surface diagrams. (a), (b), (c), an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: The isobaric capacity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Dyonic Einstein-Maxwell-scalar black holes: the cold, the hot and the plunge
gr-qc 2026-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Dyonic scalarized black holes in Einstein-Maxwell-scalar theory reach a regular extremal endpoint at f(phi_H)=Q/P, where the hot branch's Hawking temperature plunges sharply to zero.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phy s. 31, 161-170 (1973) doi:10.1007/BF01645742

doi:10.1007/bf01645742 1973
[2]

bald”/“hairy

School of Physics and Electronic Information, Weifang University, Weifang 261061, China Abstract We study the phase transition and critical phenomenon of charged black holes in Einstein-Maxwell-scalar (EMs) theory. Through comprehensive analysis of thermodynamic behaviors manifested in P − V diagrams, G(T, P ) surfaces, and CP curves, we establish that th...

work page
[3]

097829295

899525553, and Tc ≈ 0. 097829295. We also draw the P − V diagram, G(T, P )-surface diagram, and CP curve diagram as the FIG.1b, FIG.2b, and FIG.3b respectivel y. These three ﬁgures have identical characteristics with their counterparts in Case 1. Consequently, the static charged EMs black hole with D = 4, ∆ = 1, and k0 = 3 also exhibits a ﬁrst-order van d...

work page
[4]

101188311

857180480, and Tc ≈ 0. 101188311. We plot the P − V diagram, G(T, P )-surface diagram, and CP curve diagram as the FIG.1c, FIG.2c, and FIG.3c respectivel y. These three ﬁgures also have identi- cal characteristics with their counterparts in Case 1 and Ca se 2. Therefore, the static charged EMs black hole with D = 4, ∆ = 1, and k0 = 5 has a ﬁrst-order van ...

work page
[5]

threshold v alue

291352464, and Tc ≈ 0. 745010179. We also plot the P − V diagram, G(T, P )-surface diagram, and CP curve diagram as the FIG.1d, FIG.2d, and FIG.3d respectivel y. These three ﬁgures also have identical characteristics with their counterparts in previous cases. Consequently, the static charged EMs black hole with D = 5, ∆ = 2, and k0 = 3 4 exists a ﬁrst-ord...

work page
[6]

J. D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D 7, 2333-2346 (1973) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333

doi:10.1103/physrevd.7.2333 1973
[7]

S. W. Hawking, Nature 248, 30-31 (1974) doi:10.1038/248030a0

doi:10.1038/248030a0 1974
[8]

S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 43, 199-220 (1975) [erratum: Commun. Math. Phys. 46, 206 (1976)] doi:10.1007/BF02345020

doi:10.1007/bf02345020 1975

Show all 55 references

[9]

J. D. Bekenstein, Lett. Nuovo Cim. 4, 737-740 (1972) doi:10.1007/BF02757029

1972 doi
[10]

S. W. Hawking and D. N. Page, Commun. Math. Phys. 87, 577 (1983) doi:10.1007/BF01208266

1983 doi
[11]

Kastor, S

D. Kastor, S. Ray and J. Traschen, Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 195011 (2009) doi:10.1088/0264- 9381/26/19/195011 [arXiv:0904.2765 [hep-th]]

2009 arXiv
[12]

Kubiznak and R

D. Kubiznak and R. B. Mann, JHEP 07, 033 (2012) doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2012)033 [arXiv:1205.0559 [hep-th]]. 20

2012 arXiv
[13]

Witten, Adv

E. Witten, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 505-532 (1998) doi:10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n3.a3 [arXiv:hep-th/9803131 [hep-th]]

1998 arXiv
[14]

S. A. Hartnoll, C. P. Herzog and G. T. Horowitz, JHEP 12, 015 (2008) doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2008/12/015 [arXiv:0810.1563 [hep-th]]

2008 arXiv
[15]

M. M. Roberts and S. A. Hartnoll, JHEP 08, 035 (2008) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/08/035 [arXiv:0805.3898 [hep-th]]

2008 arXiv
[16]

R. G. Cai, Phys. Rev. D 65, 084014 (2002) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.084014 [arXiv:hep-th/0 109133 [hep-th]]

2002 doi
[17]

R. G. Cai, L. M. Cao, L. Li and R. Q. Yang, JHEP 09, 005 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)005 [arXiv:1306.6233 [gr-qc]]

2013 arXiv
[18]

Y. P. Hu, H. A. Zeng, Z. M. Jiang and H. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 100, no.8, 084004 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.084004 [arXiv:1812.09938 [gr-qc]]

2019 arXiv
[19]

R. G. Cai and S. P. Kim, JHEP 02, 050 (2005) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/02/050 [arXiv:hep-th/0501055 [hep-th]]

2005 arXiv
[20]

R. G. Cai and L. M. Cao, Phys. Rev. D 75, 064008 (2007) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.064008 [arXiv:gr-qc/0611071 [gr-qc]]

2007 arXiv
[21]

Abdusattar, S

H. Abdusattar, S. B. Kong, H. Zhang and Y. P. Hu, Phys. Dark Univ. 42, 101330 (2023) doi:10.1016/j.dark.2023.101330 [arXiv:2301.01938 [gr-qc]]

2023
[22]

S. B. Kong, H. Abdusattar, Y. Yin, H. Zhang and Y. P. Hu, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, no.11, 1047 (2022) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10976-9 [arXiv:2108.09411 [gr-qc ]]

2022 arXiv
[23]

R. G. Cai, S. P. Kim and B. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 76, 024011 (2007) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.024011 [arXiv:0705.2469 [hep-th]]

2007 arXiv
[24]

Y. Chu, S. B. Kong, Y. Liu, H. Zhang and Y. P. Hu, [arXiv:2502.13 782 [gr-qc]]
[25]

D. C. Zou, S. J. Zhang and B. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 89, no.4, 044002 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.044002 [arXiv:1311.7299 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[26]

Y. Z. Du, H. F. Li, Y. B. Ma and Q. Gu, Nucl. Phys. B 1006, 116641 (2024) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2024.116641 [arXiv:2309.00224 [hep-th]]

2024
[27]

M. S. Ma, R. Zhao and Y. S. Liu, Class. Quant. Grav. 34, no.16, 165009 (2017) doi:10.1088/1361- 6382/aa8000 [arXiv:1604.06998 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[28]

X. P. Li, L. C. Zhang, Y. B. Ma and H. F. Li, Chin. Phys. C 47, no.10, 105102 (2023) doi:10.1088/1674- 1137/ace8f5

2023 doi
[29]

Zhang, W

Y. Zhang, W. q. Wang, Y. b. Ma and J. Wang, Adv. High Energy Ph ys. 2020, 7263059 (2020) doi:10.1155/2020/7263059 [arXiv:2004.06796 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[30]

Y. Z. Du, H. F. Li, F. Liu, R. Zhao and L. C. Zhang, Chin. Phys. C 45, no.11, 112001 (2021) doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ac2049 [arXiv:2112.10403 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[31]

Zhang, Y

Y. Zhang, Y. B. Ma, Y. Z. Du, H. F. Li and L. C. Zhang, Eur. Phy s. J. C 82, 770 (2022) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10729-8 [arXiv:2204.04470 [hep-t h]]. 21

2022 arXiv
[32]

S. W. Wei and Y. X. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, no.11, 111302 (2015) [erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, no.16, 169903 (2016)] doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.111302 [arXiv :1502.00386 [gr-qc]]

2015 arXiv
[33]

X. X. Zeng and L. F. Li, Phys. Lett. B 764, 100-108 (2017) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.11.017 [arXiv:1512.08855 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[34]

Y. Ma, Y. Zhang, R. Zhao, S. Cao, T. Liu, S. Geng, Y. Liu and Y. H uang, doi:10.1142/S0218271820501084 [arXiv:1907.11870 [hep-th]]

1907 arXiv
[35]

S. W. Wei, Y. X. Liu and R. B. Mann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, no.19, 191101 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.191101 [arXiv:2208.01932 [gr-qc]]

2022 arXiv
[36]

Zhao, Chin

L. Zhao, Chin. Phys. C 46, no.5, 055105 (2022) doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ac4f4c [arXiv:2201.0 0521 [hep- th]]

2022 doi
[37]

Z. Gao, X. Kong and L. Zhao, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, no.2, 112 (2022) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10080-y [arXiv:2112.08672 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[38]

Abdusattar, S

H. Abdusattar, S. B. Kong, W. L. You, H. Zhang and Y. P. Hu, J HEP 12, 168 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2022)168 [arXiv:2108.09407 [gr-qc]]

2022 arXiv
[39]

G. T. Horowitz, [arXiv:hep-th/9210119 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[40]

H. Lu, C. N. Pope, E. Sezgin and K. S. Stelle, Phys. Lett. B 371, 46-50 (1996) doi:10.1016/0370- 2693(95)01595-7 [arXiv:hep-th/9511203 [hep-th]]

1996 arXiv
[41]

H. Lu, C. N. Pope and Q. Wen, JHEP 03, 165 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2015)165 [arXiv:1408.1514 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[42]

L. Ma, Y. Pang and H. Lu, JHEP 10, 142 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2022)142 [arXiv:2202.08290 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[43]

L. Ma, Y. Pang and H. Lu, JHEP 01, 012 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2024)012 [arXiv:2310.16899 [hep-th]]

2024 arXiv
[44]

Huang, Z

H. Huang, Z. Y. Fan and H. L¨ u, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, no.11, 975 (2019) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019- 7477-x [arXiv:1908.07970 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[45]

H. L¨ u, P. Mao and J. B. Wu, JHEP 11, 005 (2019) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2019)005 [arXiv:1909.00970 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[46]

H. S. Liu, H. Lu and C. N. Pope, Phys. Rev. D 92, 064014 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.064014 [arXiv:1507.02294 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[47]

Lu, JHEP 09, 112 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)112 [arXiv:1306.2386 [hep-t h]]

H. Lu, JHEP 09, 112 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)112 [arXiv:1306.2386 [hep-t h]]

2013 arXiv
[48]

H. Lu, S. Mukherji, C. N. Pope and J. Rahmfeld, Phys. Lett. B 389, 248-254 (1996) doi:10.1016/S0370- 2693(96)01280-4 [arXiv:hep-th/9604127 [hep-th]]

1996 arXiv
[49]

M. G. Richarte, ´E. L. Martins and J. C. Fabris, Phys. Rev. D 105, no.6, 064043 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.064043 [arXiv:2111.01595 [gr-qc]]

2022 arXiv
[50]

Cremmer, J

E. Cremmer, J. Scherk and S. Ferrara, Phys. Lett. B 74, 61-64 (1978) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(78)90060-6

1978 doi
[51]

Ferrara, R

S. Ferrara, R. Kallosh and A. Strominger, Phys. Rev. D 52, R5412-R5416 (1995) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.52.R5412 [arXiv:hep-th/9508072 [hep-th]]. 22

1995 arXiv
[52]

S. Yu, J. Qiu and C. Gao, Class. Quant. Grav. 38, no.10, 105006 (2021) doi:10.1088/1361-6382/abf2f5 [arXiv:2005.14476 [gr-qc]]

2021 arXiv
[53]

T. Y. Yu and W. Y. Wen, Phys. Lett. B 781, 713-718 (2018) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.04.060 [arXiv:1803.07916 [gr-qc]]

2018 arXiv
[54]

C. J. Gao and S. N. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 70, 124019 (2004) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.124019 [arXiv:hep-th/0411104 [hep-th]]

2004 arXiv
[55]

C. J. Gao and S. N. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 605, 185-189 (2005) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.11.030 [arXiv:hep-th/0411105 [hep-th]]. T=Tc/1.5 T=Tc T=1.5Tc 1 2 3 4 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 r0 P (a) T=Tc/1.5 T=Tc T=1.5Tc 1 2 3 4-0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 r0 P (b) T=Tc/1.5 T=Tc T...

2005 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phy s. 31, 161-170 (1973) doi:10.1007/BF01645742

doi:10.1007/bf01645742 1973

[2] [2]

bald”/“hairy

School of Physics and Electronic Information, Weifang University, Weifang 261061, China Abstract We study the phase transition and critical phenomenon of charged black holes in Einstein-Maxwell-scalar (EMs) theory. Through comprehensive analysis of thermodynamic behaviors manifested in P − V diagrams, G(T, P ) surfaces, and CP curves, we establish that th...

work page

[3] [3]

097829295

899525553, and Tc ≈ 0. 097829295. We also draw the P − V diagram, G(T, P )-surface diagram, and CP curve diagram as the FIG.1b, FIG.2b, and FIG.3b respectivel y. These three ﬁgures have identical characteristics with their counterparts in Case 1. Consequently, the static charged EMs black hole with D = 4, ∆ = 1, and k0 = 3 also exhibits a ﬁrst-order van d...

work page

[4] [4]

101188311

857180480, and Tc ≈ 0. 101188311. We plot the P − V diagram, G(T, P )-surface diagram, and CP curve diagram as the FIG.1c, FIG.2c, and FIG.3c respectivel y. These three ﬁgures also have identi- cal characteristics with their counterparts in Case 1 and Ca se 2. Therefore, the static charged EMs black hole with D = 4, ∆ = 1, and k0 = 5 has a ﬁrst-order van ...

work page

[5] [5]

threshold v alue

291352464, and Tc ≈ 0. 745010179. We also plot the P − V diagram, G(T, P )-surface diagram, and CP curve diagram as the FIG.1d, FIG.2d, and FIG.3d respectivel y. These three ﬁgures also have identical characteristics with their counterparts in previous cases. Consequently, the static charged EMs black hole with D = 5, ∆ = 2, and k0 = 3 4 exists a ﬁrst-ord...

work page

[6] [6]

J. D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D 7, 2333-2346 (1973) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333

doi:10.1103/physrevd.7.2333 1973

[7] [7]

S. W. Hawking, Nature 248, 30-31 (1974) doi:10.1038/248030a0

doi:10.1038/248030a0 1974

[8] [8]

S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 43, 199-220 (1975) [erratum: Commun. Math. Phys. 46, 206 (1976)] doi:10.1007/BF02345020

doi:10.1007/bf02345020 1975