MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1492073109 · doi:10.1063/1.2399688

Late-time Inhomogeneity and Acceleration of the Universe

2006· article· en· W1492073109 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeceleration parameterCosmic microwave backgroundAccelerationIsotropyMetric expansion of spaceDe Sitter universeGalaxyUniverseGravitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inhomogeneous distribution of matter in the non‐linear regime of galaxies, clusters of galaxies and voids is described by an exact, spherically symmetric inhomogeneous solution of Einstein’s gravitational field equations, corresponding to an under‐dense void. The solution becomes the homogeneous and isotropic Einstein‐de Sitter solution for a red shift z > 10 – 20, which describes the matter dominated CMB data with small inhomogeneities. A spatial volume averaging of physical quantities is introduced and the averaged time evolution expansion parameter θ can give rise in the late‐time universe to a volume averaged deceleration parameter 〈q〉 that is negative for a positive matter density. This allows for a region of accelerated expansion which does not require a cosmological constant. A negative deceleration parameter can be derived by this volume averaging procedure from the Lemaître‐Tolman‐Bondi open void solution, which describes the late‐time non‐linear regime associated with galaxies and under‐dense voids and solves the “coincidence” problem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207