MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1944872180 · doi:10.1007/jhep01(2016)108

Features and stability analysis of non-Schwarzschild black hole in quadratic gravity

2016· article· en· W1944872180 on OpenAlexaff
Yi-Fu Cai, Hezi Zhang, Junyu Liu, Gong Cheng, Min Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersRecruitment Program of Global ExpertsUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPhysicsSchwarzschild radiusSchwarzschild metricPhoton sphereBlack hole (networking)CurvatureScalar (mathematics)GravitationScalar fieldQuadratic equationClassical mechanicsTheoretical physicsMathematical physicsCharged black holeGeneral relativityGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black holes are found to exist in gravitational theories with the presence of quadratic curvature terms and behave differently from the Schwarzschild solution. We present an exhaustive analysis for determining the quasinormal modes of a test scalar field propagating in a new class of black hole backgrounds in the case of pure Einstein-Weyl gravity. Our result shows that the field decay of quasinormal modes in such a non- Schwarzschild black hole behaves similarly to the Schwarzschild one, but the decay slope becomes much smoother due to the appearance of the Weyl tensor square in the background theory. We also analyze the frequencies of the quasinormal modes in order to characterize the properties of new back holes, and thus, if these modes can be the source of gravitational waves, the underlying theories may be testable in future gravitational wave experiments. We briefly comment on the issue of quantum (in)stability in this theory at linear order.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations34
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207