MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967875432 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.044012

Multiscale analysis of the electromagnetic self-force in a weak gravitational field

2008· article· en· W1967875432 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Pound, Eric Poisson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGravitational fieldPhysicsClassical mechanicsEccentricity (behavior)Conservative forceGravitationOrbit (dynamics)Electromagnetic fieldQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the motion of a charged particle in a weak gravitational field. In addition to the Newtonian gravity exerted by a large central body, the particle is subjected to an electromagnetic self-force that contains both a conservative piece and a radiation-reaction piece. This toy problem shares many of the features of the strong-field gravitational self-force problem, and it is sufficiently simple that it can be solved exactly with numerical methods, and approximately with analytical methods. We submit the equations of motion to a multiscale analysis, and we examine the roles of the conservative and radiation-reaction pieces of the self-force. We show that the radiation-reaction force drives secular changes in the orbit's semilatus rectum and eccentricity, while the conservative force drives a secular regression of the periapsis and affects the orbital time function; neglect of the conservative term can hence give rise to an important phasing error. We next examine what might be required in the formulation of a reliable secular approximation for the orbital evolution; this would capture all secular changes in the orbit and discard all irrelevant oscillations. We conclude that such an approximation would be very difficult to formulate without prior knowledge of the exact solution.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations46
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207