MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989170879 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.121101

Evolution of Binary Black-Hole Spacetimes

2005· article· en· W1989170879 on OpenAlexaff
Frans Pretorius

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsBinary black holeBlack hole (networking)Gravitational waveAngular momentumBinary numberOrbit (dynamics)Rotating black holeClassical mechanicsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe early success in the evolution of binary black-hole spacetimes with a numerical code based on a generalization of harmonic coordinates. Indications are that with sufficient resolution this scheme is capable of evolving binary systems for enough time to extract information about the orbit, merger, and gravitational waves emitted during the event. As an example we show results from the evolution of a binary composed of two equal mass, nonspinning black holes, through a single plunge orbit, merger, and ringdown. The resultant black hole is estimated to be a Kerr black hole with angular momentum parameter a approximately 0.70. At present, lack of resolution far from the binary prevents an accurate estimate of the energy emitted, though a rough calculation suggests on the order of 5% of the initial rest mass of the system is radiated as gravitational waves during the final orbit and ringdown.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1,515
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207