MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1578633552 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.78.123006

Gravitational radiation from primordial helical inverse cascade magnetohydrodynamic turbulence

2008· article· en· W1578633552 on OpenAlexaff
Tina Kahniashvili, Leonardo Campanelli, G. Gogoberidze, Y. Maravin, Bharat Ratra

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetohydrodynamicsGravitational waveMagnetohydrodynamic turbulenceCascadeElectroweak interactionTurbulenceQuantum electrodynamicsMagnetohydrodynamic driveClassical mechanicsComputational physicsAstrophysicsMechanicsMagnetic fieldQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the generation of gravitational waves by primordial helical inverse-cascade magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) turbulence produced by bubble collisions at the electroweak phase transition. We extend the previous study [1] by considering both currently discussed models of MHD turbulence. For popular electroweak phase transition parameter values, the generated gravitational wave spectrum is only weakly dependent on the MHD turbulence model. Compared with the unmagnetized electroweak phase transition case, the spectrum of MHD-turbulence-generated gravitational waves peaks at lower frequency with larger amplitude and can be detected by the proposed Laser Interferometer Space Antenna.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations107
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207