MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021247101 · doi:10.1007/s10714-009-0905-8

Generalized harmonic formulation in spherical symmetry

2009· article· en· W2021247101 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueGeneral Relativity and Gravitation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsCircular symmetryZonal spherical harmonicsNumerical relativityGeneral relativitySpherical harmonicsDifferential geometrySymmetry (geometry)Scalar (mathematics)Context (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this pedagogically structured article, we describe a generalized harmonic (GH) formulation of the Einstein equations in spherical symmetry which is regular at the origin. The GH approach has attracted significant attention in numerical relativity over the past few years, especially as applied to the problem of binary inspiral and merger. A key issue when using the technique is the choice of the gauge source functions, and recent work has provided several prescriptions for gauge drivers designed to evolve these functions in a controlled way. We numerically investigate the parameter spaces of some of these drivers in the context of fully non-linear collapse of a real, massless scalar field, and determine nearly optimal parameter settings for specific situations. Surprisingly, we find that many of the drivers that perform well in 3 + 1 calculations that use Cartesian coordinates, are considerably less effective in spherical symmetry, where some of them are, in fact, unstable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneral Relativity and GravitationSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207