MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Periastron Advance in Black-Hole Binaries

2011· article· en· W2022766564 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandre Le Tiec, Abdul Mroué, Leor Barack, Alessandra Buonanno, Harald Pfeiffer, Norichika Sago, Andrea Taracchini

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoCanada Research ChairsMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationGovernment of OntarioCompute CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsGeneral relativityBlack hole (networking)Numerical relativityGravitationTheory of relativityTests of general relativityGravitational waveTheoretical physicsClassical mechanicsAstrophysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The general relativistic (Mercury-type) periastron advance is calculated here for the first time with exquisite precision in full general relativity. We use accurate numerical relativity simulations of spinless black-hole binaries with mass ratios 1/8≤m(1)/m(2)≤1 and compare with the predictions of several analytic approximation schemes. We find the effective-one-body model to be remarkably accurate and, surprisingly, so also the predictions of self-force theory [replacing m(1)/m(2)→m(1)m(2)/(m(1)+m(2))(2)]. Our results can inform a universal analytic model of the two-body dynamics, crucial for ongoing and future gravitational-wave searches.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations164
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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