On generic parametrizations of spinning black-hole geometries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The construction of a generic parametrization of spinning geometries that can be matched continuously to the Kerr metric is an important open problem in general relativity. Its resolution is of more than academic interest, as it allows us to parametrize and quantify possible deviations from the no-hair theorem. Various approaches to the problem have been proposed, all with their own (severe) limitations. Here we discuss the metric recently proposed by Johannsen and Psaltis, showing that (i) the original metric describes only corrections that preserve the horizon area-mass relation of nonspinning geometries, (ii) this unnecessary restriction can be relaxed by introducing a new parameter that in fact dominates in both the weak-field and strong-field regimes, (iii) within this framework, we construct the most generic spinning black-hole geometry that contains twice as many (infinite) parameters as the original metric, and (iv) in the strong-field regime, all parameters are (roughly) equally important. This fact introduces a severe degeneracy problem in the case of highly spinning black holes. Our results suggest that using parametrizations that affect only the quadrupole moment of the Kerr geometry is problematic, because higher-order multipoles can be equally relevant for highly spinning objects. Finally, we prove that even our generalization fails to describe the few known spinning black-hole metrics in modified gravity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".