MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1949933012 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.68.023502

Bianchi type IX brane-world cosmologies

2003· article· en· W1949933012 on OpenAlexaff
R. J. van den Hoogen, A. A. Coley, Yanjing He

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversitySt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalar fieldPhysicsMathematical physicsBraneAsymptoteSingularityPerfect fluidMassless particleScalar (mathematics)Theoretical physicsGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the asymptotic properties of the Bianchi type IX cosmological model in the brane-world scenario. The matter content is assumed to be a combination of a perfect fluid and a minimimally coupled scalar field that is restricted to the brane. A detailed qualitative analysis of the Bianchi type IX brane-world containing a scalar field having an exponential potential is undertaken. It is found that the brane-Robertson-Walker solution is a local source for the expanding Bianchi type IX models, and if ${k}^{2}<2$ the ever-expanding Bianchi IX models asymptote to the power-law inflationary solution. The only other local sink is the contracting brane-Robertson Walker solution. An analysis of the Bianchi type IX models with a scalar field with a general potential is discussed, and it is shown that in the case of expanding models, for physical scalar field potentials close to the initial singularity, the scalar field is effectively massless, and the solution is approximated by the brane-Robertson Walker model.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations40
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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