Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Asymptotically safe quantum gravity predicts a positive Goroff-Sagnotti Wilson coefficient, and therefore finite tidal forces at extremal Kerr horizons, provided the quantum gravity scale is at least of order the Planck mass.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 22:52 UTC pith:O4XK634O

load-bearing objection Interesting new computation of the Goroff-Sagnotti coefficient from asymptotic safety, but the advertised trans-Planckian conclusion is inverted by the paper's own Eq. (13). the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2509.07058 v2 pith:O4XK634O submitted 2025-09-08 hep-th gr-qc

Impact of quantum gravity on the UV sensitivity of extremal black holes

Francesco Del Porro , Francesco Ferrarin , Alessia Platania This is my paper
classification hep-th gr-qc MSC 83C5783C4581T17 PACS 04.60.-m04.70.-s11.10.Hi
keywords asymptotically safe quantum gravityextremal Kerr black holestidal forcesGoroff-Sagnotti operatorWilson coefficientsrenormalization groupultraviolet sensitivityhigher-derivative gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Recent work found that higher-derivative corrections to Einstein gravity can produce divergent tidal forces at the horizon of extremal rotating black holes, regardless of the black hole's mass. Whether those divergences occur depends on Wilson coefficients of the low-energy effective field theory, coefficients that general relativity itself does not fix. This paper derives those coefficients from asymptotically safe quantum gravity, a scenario where gravity becomes a consistent quantum field theory at an interacting ultraviolet fixed point. It finds a positive Goroff-Sagnotti coefficient, the sign that keeps horizon tidal forces finite, and shows that this outcome survives only if the quantum gravity scale is at least around a tenth of the Planck mass.

Core claim

The paper computes the Wilson coefficient of the Goroff-Sagnotti operator, the unique essential six-derivative correction to Einstein gravity in four dimensions, from the renormalization-group flow of asymptotically safe quantum gravity. In the truncation considered, the flow has an interacting fixed point with a single relevant direction, so once the Planck mass fixes the unit scale there is a unique ultraviolet-complete trajectory and hence a unique low-energy EFT. After subtracting logarithmic running, the coefficient comes out positive—about 9.6e-3 G_N in the first regularization scheme and 3.02e-6 G_N in a second—and the sign is unchanged across schemes. Since a negative coefficient wou

What carries the argument

The Goroff-Sagnotti operator C^3, the leading essential six-derivative curvature invariant in four dimensions, whose Wilson coefficient η controls the tidal-force exponent shift at the horizon. The argument runs through the functional renormalization group beta functions for Newton's coupling and the Goroff-Sagnotti coupling, the non-Gaussian fixed point with one relevant direction, the unique separatrix trajectory to the infrared, and a logarithmic-subtraction prescription that extracts the physical Wilson coefficient from the running couplings.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion assumes that the six-derivative Goroff-Sagnotti truncation is sufficient: if the eight-derivative operators K^2 and K̃^2, which the reference black-hole analysis includes, turn out to have Wilson coefficients of the wrong sign from the same RG flow, the tidal-force singularity could return.

What would settle it

Compute the Wilson coefficients of the eight-derivative operators K^2 and K̃^2 in the same asymptotically safe renormalization-group setup and check the sign of their contributions to the horizon exponent shift; if γ−2<0 once they are included, the paper's regularity conclusion fails. A second, complementary check would be to find a UV completion or consistency bound that forces the quantum gravity scale below about 0.4 M_Pl, which would make the predicted divergences reappear.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • In fundamental asymptotically safe quantum gravity, the unique UV-complete trajectory yields a positive Goroff-Sagnotti coefficient, so extremal Kerr tidal forces remain finite at the horizon.
  • The sign of the coefficient is robust across two different regularization schemes, even though its magnitude differs by orders of magnitude.
  • If the quantum gravity scale satisfies k0 ≳ O(10^{-1}) M_Pl, horizon-scale ultraviolet sensitivity is avoided; below that scale the tidal-force divergences reappear.
  • In an effective realization of asymptotic safety with a sub-Planckian transition scale, the same framework predicts divergent tidal forces rather than regular ones.
  • The result converts the previously free Wilson coefficients of the pure-gravity EFT into a concrete prediction from a UV completion, making the UV-sensitivity question empirically sharp.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper's logic suggests a possible general sign property of essential higher-curvature couplings in asymptotically safe gravity; a direct check would be to compute the Wilson coefficients of the eight-derivative operators K^2 and K̃^2 in the same RG setup.
  • If the argument were extended to extremal Kerr-Newman black holes, where the divergences are stronger and less sensitive to coefficient values, the combined gravity-matter UV completion may need to be invoked; the paper flags this as an open direction.
  • The numerical bound k0 ≳ O(10^{-1}) M_Pl should be considered prescription-dependent until logarithmic form factors are included directly in the effective action, a computation the paper leaves for future work.
  • A sharper test of the central claim would compare the predicted positive sign against other UV-completion frameworks or against bounds from causality and unitarity of the low-energy EFT.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper addresses the recently discovered horizon-scale UV sensitivity of extremal Kerr black holes to higher-derivative EFT corrections. It computes the Wilson coefficient of the Goroff-Sagnotti operator (the six-derivative Weyl^3/R^3 term) in asymptotically safe quantum gravity, using the beta functions of [31] and a modified 'natural' regulator scheme, and extracts the coefficient with the Basile–Platania prescription. In both schemes the coefficient at k0 = M_Pl is positive (Eqs. (11) and (12)), which by the Horowitz et al. criterion (η < 0 implies tidal divergence) suggests regular horizons in this truncation. In Section IV the authors introduce ξ = k0/M_Pl and use Eq. (13) to claim that regularity requires k0 ≳ O(10^-1) M_Pl, concluding that a trans-Planckian quantum-gravity scale avoids UV sensitivity.

Significance. If correct, the paper would provide a concrete link between the asymptotically safe landscape and extremal black hole physics, including a falsifiable sign prediction for the Goroff-Sagnotti coefficient. The use of two independent regulator schemes, with the sign of the coefficient unchanged, is a genuine strength. However, the advertised scale-dependence claim is invalidated by an algebraic sign error in Section IV, and the six-derivative truncation leaves the full-EFT statement unsupported. The positive sign at k0 = M_Pl is an interesting result, but it does not establish the trans-Planckian avoidance advertised in the abstract.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section IV, Eqs. (13)–(14)] The inequality is inverted. With A ≡ g_C3|M_Pl > 0 and B ≡ g_C3,IR b < 0, the condition g_C3|k0 = A + B log ξ > 0 is equivalent to log ξ < A/|B|, i.e. ξ < exp(A/|B|). Using the values below Eq. (11) gives ξ ≲ e^0.87 ≈ 2.4; the natural scheme gives ξ ≲ e^0.98 ≈ 2.7. The quoted numbers 0.42 and 0.37 are exp(−A/|B|), i.e. the reciprocals. Thus Eq. (14) should be an upper bound (k0 ≲ O(1) M_Pl), not a lower bound. For ξ = 10, the coefficient is negative, and by the paper's own criterion η < 0 implies tidal forces diverge. The abstract's claim that a trans-Planckian QG scale avoids UV sensitivity is therefore contradicted by the paper's equations.
  2. [Sections II.A and III] The divergence condition in [1] depends on λ and \tildeλ as well as η; Eq. (2) has γ = γ^(0) + η γ^(6) + λ γ^(8) + \tildeλ \tildeγ^(8). This paper computes only G_C3 (i.e. η). The statement that 'the presence of a divergence is solely contingent upon the sign of η' is true only within the six-derivative truncation that drops the eight-derivative K^2 and \tildeK^2 operators. Since the abstract and conclusions speak of horizon-scale UV sensitivity without this qualifier, the paper does not establish avoidance for the full EFT considered in [1]. The authors should either compute or bound the eight-derivative Wilson coefficients, or explicitly and consistently restrict all central claims to the six-derivative truncation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eqs. (5) and (10)] The combination g_C3,IR b is used as a single fitted quantity, but b and g_C3,IR are not separately defined. Please state the fit parameters explicitly, including the value of b or of the combined slope.
  2. [Section III, natural scheme] The modified 'natural' beta functions are described as provided by B. Knorr in a private notebook. For reproducibility, the explicit beta functions should be included as an appendix or supplementary material, or a public citation should be given.
  3. [Reference list] Reference [31] is incomplete: it lists only authors and arXiv number. Please add the title and, if available, the journal reference.
  4. [Figure 1] The caption does not explain the color coding of the separatrix. Please describe the purple-to-red curve and the meaning of the arrows in the caption.
  5. [Abstract and Section IV] The term 'trans-Planckian' is used imprecisely. After correcting the inequality, the condition should be stated quantitatively, e.g. ξ ≲ O(1), and the abstract/introduction should be adjusted accordingly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the Goroff-Sagnotti Wilson coefficient is computed from independent beta functions, and the black-hole regularity criterion comes from external work; only minor self-citation appears in the subtraction prescription.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained in the relevant sense. The beta functions are taken from ref. [31] (Baldazzi-Falls-Kluth-Knorr), an independent computation; the NGFP, critical exponents, and separatrix are properties of those beta functions, not of the present paper. The Wilson coefficient in Eq. (11) is obtained by numerically integrating this flow and subtracting the logarithmic IR running according to the prescription of refs. [6,7]; the positive sign is an output of the flow, not an input, and it is cross-checked in a second, 'natural' regularization scheme in Eq. (12). The black-hole criterion (tidal forces diverge if eta < 0) is imported from the external analysis of Horowitz et al. [1], not from the authors' own work. The only self-citation of note is the Wilson-coefficient subtraction prescription [6,7] (co-authored by Platania), but that prescription does not fix the sign of G_C3 and therefore is not load-bearing in a circular sense. The scale-shift relation in Eq. (13) is simply the fitted logarithmic running; deriving the bound in Eq. (14) from it is a mathematical step, not a restatement of an input. The paper itself acknowledges the six-derivative truncation and the logarithmic-form-factor ambiguity as limitations; these limit robustness but do not constitute circularity. A possible sign error in the direction of the bound in Eq. (14) relative to Eq. (13) would be a correctness issue, not a circularity issue, and is outside the scope of this pass. Overall, no step in the derivation is equivalent to its input by construction, so the circularity score is low.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the beta functions of the Einstein-Hilbert plus Goroff-Sagnotti truncation, the near-horizon analysis of extremal Kerr black holes from the cited literature, and the Wilson-coefficient prescription of refs. [6,7]. The only fitted quantities are the IR constants of the RG flow; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (3)
  • gIR = 1
    Dimensionless Newton coupling in the IR; set to 1 to fix the transition scale k0^2 = G_N^{-1}. Other values would imply sub- or trans-Planckian transition scales.
  • gC3,IR b = -0.011 (scheme 1); -3.07e-6 (scheme 2)
    Slope of the logarithmic IR running of the Goroff-Sagnotti coupling, obtained by matching the numerical flow to Eqs. (5)-(6). This parameter controls the bound on the QG scale in Eq. (14).
  • k0 (or xi) = k0 = M_Pl fiducial; quoted bound xi >= 0.42 (scheme 1), xi >= 0.37 (scheme 2)
    Transition scale / scale of quantum gravity. It is not fitted but chosen by naturalness; the final conclusion depends on its value.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Beta functions of [31] correctly encode the RG flow of the Einstein-Hilbert plus Goroff-Sagnotti truncation, including the NGFP with one relevant direction.
    Used throughout Section III; the two schemes give different fixed-point values but the same sign.
  • domain assumption The near-horizon analysis of Horowitz et al. [1] is correct: for the six-derivative truncation, tidal forces diverge iff the R^3 Wilson coefficient eta < 0.
    Section II.A, Eq. (2).
  • standard math The operator R^3 and the Weyl-cubed term C^3 produce the same linearized equations of motion, so the sign of G_C3 controls the divergence.
    Section II.B, Eq. (4) and surrounding argument.
  • ad hoc to paper The prescription of refs. [6,7] for extracting Wilson coefficients (subtract the logarithmic running, set the log subtraction scale to M_Pl) yields the physically relevant coefficient.
    Section III, Eq. (10); the paper acknowledges the ambiguity in the definition of Wilson coefficients and chooses this prescription.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 12587 in / 22396 out tokens · 218079 ms · 2026-08-04T22:52:01.882936+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Impact of quantum gravity on the UV sensitivity of extremal black holes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O4XK634O

@misc{pith2026250907058,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Impact of quantum gravity on the UV sensitivity of extremal black holes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O4XK634O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07058}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Recent work has revealed that extremal Kerr black holes may exhibit a sensitivity to higher-derivative corrections to Einstein's equations, displaying singularities in the tidal forces at the horizon. However, in a purely gravitational context, this "ultraviolet sensitivity" translates into a strong dependence on the Wilson coefficients in the low-energy effective field theory. These, in turn, are fixed by the underlying theory of quantum gravity in the ultraviolet. We find a prediction for these coefficients within the framework of asymptotically safe quantum gravity, and show that, if the quantum gravity scale is trans-Planckian, this horizon-scale ultraviolet sensitivity is avoided.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.07058 by Alessia Platania, Francesco Del Porro, Francesco Ferrarin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Different zooms on the RG flow resulting from the beta functions of [31]. The flow is plotted on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Leading effective field theory corrections to the Kerr metric at all spins

    gr-qc 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Numerical solutions show that leading effective-field-theory corrections to the Kerr metric grow with spin and are largest near extremality.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

99 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Unnatural

    = ˜a+ log(k2/˜k2 0), the value of the Wilson coefficient (in our caseg C3) shifts accordingly. Hence, one needs either to perform the analysis of [1, 2] accounting for these loga- rithmic form factors, or to adopt a prescription to define the IR limit ofgC3.4 We will proceed in the latter way, 4 Progress in investigating bounds on Wilson coefficients in t...

  2. [2]

    G. T. Horowitz, M. Kolanowski, G. N. Remmen, and J. E. Santos, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 091402 (2023), arXiv:2303.07358 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    G. T. Horowitz, M. Kolanowski, G. N. Remmen, and J. E. Santos, JHEP05, 122 (2024), arXiv:2403.00051 [hep-th]. 7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Bambi, L

    C. Bambi, L. Modesto, and I. Shapiro, eds.,Handbook of Quantum Gravity(Springer, 2024)

    2024

  5. [5]

    Basile, L

    I. Basile, L. Buoninfante, F. D. Filippo, B. Knorr, A. Pla- tania, and A. Tokareva, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 98 (2025), arXiv:2412.08690 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Buoninfanteet al., SciPost Phys

    L. Buoninfanteet al., SciPost Phys. Comm. Rep. , 11 (2025), arXiv:2412.08696 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Basile and A

    I. Basile and A. Platania, Universe7, 389 (2021), arXiv:2107.06897 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Knorr and A

    B. Knorr and A. Platania, JHEP03, 003 (2025), arXiv:2405.08860 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Form Factors in Asymptotically Safe Quantum Gravity,

    B. Knorr, C. Ripken, and F. Saueressig, “Form Factors in Asymptotically Safe Quantum Gravity,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity(Springer Nature Singapore, Singa- pore, 2023) pp. 1–49, arXiv:2210.16072 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  10. [10]

    Asymptotic safety of gravity with matter,

    A. Eichhorn and M. Schiffer, “Asymptotic safety of gravity with matter,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity (Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023) pp. 1–87, arXiv:2212.07456 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  11. [11]

    The Functional f(R) Approximation,

    T. R. Morris and D. Stulga, “The Functional f(R) Approximation,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity (Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023) pp. 1–33, arXiv:2210.11356 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Perturbative Approaches to Nonperturbative Quantum Gravity,

    R. Martini, G. P. Vacca, and O. Zanusso, “Perturbative Approaches to Nonperturbative Quantum Gravity,” in Handbook of Quantum Gravity(Springer Nature Singa- pore, Singapore, 2023) pp. 1–46, arXiv:2210.13910 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  13. [13]

    Quantum Gravity and Scale Symme- try in Cosmology,

    C. Wetterich, “Quantum Gravity and Scale Symme- try in Cosmology,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity (Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023) pp. 1–68, arXiv:2211.03596 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    Black Holes in Asymptotically Safe Grav- ity,

    A. Platania, “Black Holes in Asymptotically Safe Grav- ity,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity(Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023) pp. 1–65, arXiv:2302.04272 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    The Functional Renormalization Group in Quantum Gravity,

    F. Saueressig, “The Functional Renormalization Group in Quantum Gravity,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity (Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023) pp. 1–44, arXiv:2302.14152 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    Quantum Gravity from Dynamical Metric Fluctuations,

    J. M. Pawlowski and M. Reichert, “Quantum Gravity from Dynamical Metric Fluctuations,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity(Springer Nature Singapore, Singa- pore, 2023) pp. 1–70, arXiv:2309.10785 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Asymptotic Safety and Cosmology,

    A. Bonanno, “Asymptotic Safety and Cosmology,” in Handbook of Quantum Gravity(Springer Nature Singa- pore, Singapore, 2023) pp. 1–27

    2023

  18. [18]

    Reuter, Phys

    M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D57, 971 (1998), arXiv:hep- th/9605030

    arXiv 1998

  19. [19]

    Reuter and F

    M. Reuter and F. Saueressig, Phys. Rev. D65, 065016 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0110054

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  20. [20]

    Lauscher and M

    O. Lauscher and M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D66, 025026 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0205062

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  21. [21]

    Codello and R

    A. Codello and R. Percacci, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 221301 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0607128

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  22. [22]

    H. Gies, B. Knorr, and S. Lippoldt, Phys. Rev. D92, 084020 (2015), arXiv:1507.08859 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    H. Gies, B. Knorr, S. Lippoldt, and F. Saueressig, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 211302 (2016), arXiv:1601.01800 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  24. [24]

    T. Denz, J. M. Pawlowski, and M. Reichert, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 336 (2018), arXiv:1612.07315 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  25. [25]

    Hamada and M

    Y. Hamada and M. Yamada, JHEP08, 070 (2017), arXiv:1703.09033 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    Knorr and S

    B. Knorr and S. Lippoldt, Phys. Rev. D96, 065020 (2017), arXiv:1707.01397 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    Christiansen, K

    N. Christiansen, K. Falls, J. M. Pawlowski, and M. Re- ichert, Phys. Rev. D97, 046007 (2018), arXiv:1711.09259 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  28. [28]

    Falls, C

    K. Falls, C. R. King, D. F. Litim, K. Nikolakopou- los, and C. Rahmede, Phys. Rev. D97, 086006 (2018), arXiv:1801.00162 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  29. [29]

    Falls, N

    K. Falls, N. Ohta, and R. Percacci, Phys. Lett. B810, 135773 (2020), arXiv:2004.04126 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [30]

    Knorr, SciPost Phys

    B. Knorr, SciPost Phys. Core4, 020 (2021), arXiv:2104.11336 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    Kluth and D

    Y. Kluth and D. F. Litim, Phys. Rev. D106, 106022 (2022), arXiv:2202.10436 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  32. [32]

    Baldazzi, K

    A. Baldazzi, K. Falls, Y. Kluth, and B. Knorr, (2023), arXiv:2312.03831 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  33. [33]

    P. Donà, A. Eichhorn, and R. Percacci, Phys. Rev. D 89, 084035 (2014), arXiv:1311.2898 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  34. [34]

    Christiansen, D

    N. Christiansen, D. F. Litim, J. M. Pawlowski, and M. Reichert, Phys. Rev. D97, 106012 (2018), arXiv:1710.04669 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  35. [35]

    Pastor-Gutiérrez, J

    Á. Pastor-Gutiérrez, J. M. Pawlowski, and M. Reichert, SciPost Phys.15, 105 (2023), arXiv:2207.09817 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    G. P. De Brito, N. Ohta, A. D. Pereira, A. A. Tomaz, and M. Yamada, Phys. Rev. D98, 026027 (2018), arXiv:1805.09656 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  37. [37]

    Kluth and D

    Y. Kluth and D. F. Litim, Phys. Rev. D108, 026005 (2023), arXiv:2008.09181 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    Shomer, (2007), arXiv:0709.3555 [hep-th]

    A. Shomer, (2007), arXiv:0709.3555 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  39. [39]

    Platania, Gen

    A. Platania, Gen. Rel. Grav.57, 58 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    Basile, B

    I. Basile, B. Knorr, A. Platania, and M. Schiffer, (2025), arXiv:2502.12290 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Shaposhnikov and C

    M. Shaposhnikov and C. Wetterich, Phys. Lett. B683, 196 (2010), arXiv:0912.0208 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  42. [42]

    Eichhorn and A

    A. Eichhorn and A. Held, Phys. Lett. B777, 217 (2018), arXiv:1707.01107 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  43. [43]

    Eichhorn and F

    A. Eichhorn and F. Versteegen, JHEP01, 030 (2018), arXiv:1709.07252 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  44. [44]

    Eichhorn and A

    A. Eichhorn and A. Held, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 151302 (2018), arXiv:1803.04027 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  45. [45]

    Eichhorn, Z

    A. Eichhorn, Z. Gyftopoulos, and A. Held, (2025), arXiv:2507.18304 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Percacci and G

    R. Percacci and G. P. Vacca, Class. Quant. Grav.27, 245026 (2010), arXiv:1008.3621 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  47. [47]

    de Alwis, A

    S. de Alwis, A. Eichhorn, A. Held, J. M. Pawlowski, M. Schiffer, and F. Versteegen, Phys. Lett. B798, 134991 (2019), arXiv:1907.07894 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  48. [48]

    Held, Front

    A. Held, Front. in Phys.8, 341 (2020), arXiv:2003.13642 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  49. [49]

    J. F. Donoghue and B. K. El-Menoufi, JHEP05, 118 (2015), arXiv:1503.06099 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  50. [50]

    J.F.DonoghueandG.Menezes,Phys.Rev.D97,126005 (2018), arXiv:1804.04980 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  51. [51]

    J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D100, 105006 (2019), arXiv:1908.02416 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  52. [52]

    M. H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti, Phys. Lett. B160, 81 (1985)

    1985

  53. [53]

    M. H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti, Nucl. Phys. B266, 709 (1986)

    1986

  54. [54]

    A. E. M. van de Ven, Nucl. Phys. B378, 309 (1992)

    1992

  55. [55]

    Manrique, S

    E. Manrique, S. Rechenberger, and F. Saueressig, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 251302 (2011), arXiv:1102.5012 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  56. [56]

    Biemans, A

    J. Biemans, A. Platania, and F. Saueressig, Phys. Rev. D95, 086013 (2017), arXiv:1609.04813 [hep-th]. 8

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  57. [57]

    Biemans, A

    J. Biemans, A. Platania, and F. Saueressig, JHEP05, 093 (2017), arXiv:1702.06539 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  58. [58]

    Knorr, Phys

    B. Knorr, Phys. Lett. B792, 142 (2019), arXiv:1810.07971 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  59. [59]

    Eichhorn, A

    A. Eichhorn, A. Platania, and M. Schiffer, Phys. Rev. D 102, 026007 (2020), arXiv:1911.10066 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  60. [60]

    Bonanno, T.Denz, J.M.Pawlowski, andM.Reichert, SciPost Phys.12, 001 (2022), arXiv:2102.02217 [hep-th]

    A. Bonanno, T.Denz, J.M.Pawlowski, andM.Reichert, SciPost Phys.12, 001 (2022), arXiv:2102.02217 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  61. [61]

    Fehre, D

    J. Fehre, D. F. Litim, J. M. Pawlowski, and M. Reichert, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 081501 (2023), arXiv:2111.13232 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  62. [62]

    Banerjee and M

    R. Banerjee and M. Niedermaier, Nucl. Phys. B980, 115814 (2022), arXiv:2201.02575 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    D’Angelo, N

    E. D’Angelo, N. Drago, N. Pinamonti, and K. Re- jzner, Annales Henri Poincare25, 2295 (2024), arXiv:2202.07580 [math-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  64. [64]

    A Lorentzian renormalisa- tion group equation for gauge theories,

    E. D’Angelo and K. Rejzner, “A Lorentzian renormalisa- tion group equation for gauge theories,” (2023), arXiv Preprint, arXiv:2303.01479 [math-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    J. M. Pawlowski, M. Reichert, and J. Wessely, (2025), arXiv:2507.22169 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    V. Kher, B. King, D. F. Litim, and M. Reichert, (2025), arXiv:2507.17862 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Baldazzi, R

    A. Baldazzi, R. B. A. Zinati, and K. Falls, SciPost Phys. 13, 085 (2022), arXiv:2105.11482 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  68. [68]

    Baldazzi and K

    A. Baldazzi and K. Falls, Universe7, 294 (2021), arXiv:2107.00671 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    Knorr, Phys

    B. Knorr, Phys. Rev. D110, 026001 (2024), arXiv:2311.12097 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    S. A. Fulling, R. C. King, B. G. Wybourne, and C. J. Cummins, Class. Quant. Grav.9, 1151 (1992)

    1992

  71. [71]

    Percacci,An Introduction to Covariant Quantum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety,100YearsofGeneralRel- ativity, Vol

    R. Percacci,An Introduction to Covariant Quantum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety,100YearsofGeneralRel- ativity, Vol. 3 (World Scientific, 2017)

    2017

  72. [72]

    Dupuis, L

    N. Dupuis, L. Canet, A. Eichhorn, W. Metzner, J. M. Pawlowski, M. Tissier, and N. Wschebor, Phys. Rept. 910, 1 (2021), arXiv:2006.04853 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  73. [73]

    Bonanno, A

    A. Bonanno, A. Eichhorn, H. Gies, J. M. Pawlowski, R. Percacci, M. Reuter, F. Saueressig, and G. P. Vacca, Front. in Phys.8, 269 (2020), arXiv:2004.06810 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  74. [74]

    Buccio, J

    D. Buccio, J. F. Donoghue, and R. Percacci, Phys. Rev. D109, 045008 (2024), arXiv:2307.00055 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  75. [75]

    Buccio, J

    D. Buccio, J. F. Donoghue, G. Menezes, and R. Percacci, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 021604 (2024), arXiv:2403.02397 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  76. [76]

    Knorr, C

    B. Knorr, C. Ripken, and F. Saueressig, Class. Quant. Grav.36, 234001 (2019), arXiv:1907.02903 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  77. [77]

    Draper, B

    T. Draper, B. Knorr, C. Ripken, and F. Saueressig, JHEP11, 136 (2020), arXiv:2007.04396 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  78. [78]

    Knorr, C

    B. Knorr, C. Ripken, and F. Saueressig, Nuovo Cim. C 45, 28 (2022), arXiv:2111.12365 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  79. [79]

    Alberte, C

    L. Alberte, C. de Rham, S. Jaitly, and A. J. Tolley, Phys. Rev. D102, 125023 (2020), arXiv:2007.12667 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  80. [80]

    Herrero-Valea, R

    M. Herrero-Valea, R. Santos-Garcia, and A. Tokareva, Phys. Rev. D104, 085022 (2021), arXiv:2011.11652 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

Showing first 80 references.