MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1670454368 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.86.084041

Stability analysis of the Witten black hole (cigar soliton) under world-sheet renormalization group flow

2012· article· en· W1670454368 on OpenAlexaff
Carolyn U. Lambert, Vardarajan Suneeta

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolitonRicci flowMathematical physicsPhysicsBlack hole (networking)Flow (mathematics)Renormalization groupGroup (periodic table)Space (punctuation)Euclidean geometryMathematicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryMechanicsRicci curvatureNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the stability of the Euclidean Witten black hole (the cigar soliton in mathematics literature) under first-order renormalization group (Ricci) flow of the world-sheet sigma model. This analysis is from the target space point of view. We find that the Witten black hole has no unstable normalizable perturbative modes in a linearized mode analysis in which we consider circularly symmetric perturbations. Finally, we discuss a result from mathematics that implies the existence of a nonnormalizable mode of the Witten black hole under which the geometry flows to the sausage solution studied by Fateev, Onofri and Zamolodchikov.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→