Why don't two-scalar theories naturally suppress scalarization in the stellar-mass range that LIGO observes?

This is an excellent technical question that gets right to the heart of why two-scalar theories fail to produce the "mass-dependent scalarization window" that would explain current observations.

The core problem

The intuition behind wanting a mass-dependent window is straightforward: LIGO observes stellar-mass black holes (∼5–50 M☉) that show no sign of scalarization, yet we'd like a theory where *supermassive* black holes (∼10⁹ M☉) *do* scalarize. This would be a smoking gun for modified gravity. But two-scalar theories don't naturally deliver this.

Why two-scalar EFTs fail

When you integrate out a heavy scalar field to produce an effective single-scalar theory, you get a specific relationship between coupling strength and mass scale [AG-2025.06-675]. The problem is simple: the resulting effective field theory has the wrong sign in its coupling or the wrong hierarchy of scales to suppress scalarization in the LIGO band while enabling it for supermassive objects.

More directly, two-scalar theories can absolutely violate black hole uniqueness—they permit both curvature-induced and spin-induced scalarization [AG-2025.06-675]. The catch is that they do this indiscriminately: they don't naturally confine scalarization to supermassive black holes alone. Once the theory parameters allow scalarization, it tends to happen across a broad range of masses, including the stellar-mass range LIGO probes.

The observational tension

Current LIGO/Virgo constraints on the scalar-Gauss-Bonnet coupling length scale λ are already quite tight [AG-2025.05-311]. This small λ implies that supermassive black holes *shouldn't* scalarize in a straightforward theory—a problem. Recent proposals suggest scalarization might occur in a narrow mass window, leaving LIGO sources untouched, but this requires careful tuning of parameters rather than emerging naturally from the theory's structure [AG-2025.05-311].

When you search directly in LIGO data for signatures of massive scalars and scalarization, you find no evidence and set stringent coupling limits [AG-2024.10-366], further constraining any two-scalar model that tries to hide effects in stellar-mass binaries while producing them elsewhere.

Why this matters

Two-scalar theories are theoretically well-motivated (dark matter, ultralight bosons), but they're too "trigger-happy" with scalarization. They don't give you a clean knob to turn that produces scalarization only in a specific mass range. This suggests that if scalarization is real, the underlying theory must have a more sophisticated structure—perhaps involving additional fields, environmental effects, or a fundamentally different coupling architecture.